Eveready Australia Pty Ltd v Gillette Australia Pty Ltd (No 3) [1999] FCA 1543

Eveready Australia Pty Ltd v Gillette Australia Pty Ltd (No 3) [1999] FCA 1543

The six volumes of survey questionnaires and answers were not admitted because they were tendered at a late stage, Gillette had not previously been notified that they would be relied on as evidence despite discovery, senior counsel for Gillette would need time to study them for further cross-examination, admission...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Ruling on Tender of Documents / During Hearing, When the Applicant Sought to Tender Survey Questionnaires and Answers Through Its Last Witness Before Cross Examination
Outcome
Tender rejected
Legal Topics
['tender of Documents' 'survey Evidence' 'late Admission of Evidence' 'procedural Fairness' 'practice Note 11']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure'] ['tender of Documents' 'survey Evidence' 'late Admission of Evidence' 'procedural Fairness' 'practice Note 11']

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Ruling on Tender of Documents / During Hearing, When the Applicant Sought to Tender Survey Questionnaires and Answers Through Its Last Witness Before Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether six volumes of survey questionnaires and answers should be admitted into evidence at a late stage of the hearing.' "Whether the respondent's opportunity to inspect the documents after discovery answered the prejudice caused by late tender." 'Whether admission would cause practical difficulties requiring adjournment and further cross-examination.']

Ratio Decidendi

The six volumes of survey questionnaires and answers were not admitted because they were tendered at a late stage, Gillette had not previously been notified that they would be relied on as evidence despite discovery, senior counsel for Gillette would need time to study them for further cross-examination, admission would likely disrupt the hearing, and the Court would face practical difficulty assessing the voluminous disputed material by submissions alone.

Court Disposition

Tender rejected

Orders

  • ['The tender of the six volumes of survey questionnaires and answers is rejected.']