Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [1999] NSWSC 1081

Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [1999] NSWSC 1081

The defendant was entitled to further discovery only to the extent that each requested category could be sufficiently connected to exposed issues and was not unduly broad, oppressive or a fishing exercise. Applying SCR Pt 23 r 3 and the Court's general power, the Court limited or refused several categories, required discovery of others by class or by specified documents, and left any claims of privilege or inspection issues to be dealt with later.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Defendant's Notice of Motion for Further Discovery
Outcome
Notice of Motion for further discovery allowed in part; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['discovery' 'further and Better Discovery' 'verified List of Documents' 'privilege' 'interlocutory Application']
['civil Procedure' 'defamation'] ['discovery' 'further and Better Discovery' 'verified List of Documents' 'privilege' 'interlocutory Application']

Case Brief

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

Defamation Proceedings / Defendant's Notice of Motion for Further Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff should be ordered to provide further and better discovery of documents in the 35 categories set out in the defendant's Notice of Motion." "What limitations should be imposed on any discovery required from the plaintiff under SCR Pt 23 r 3, having regard to relevance, oppression, fishing, the proximity of trial and the plaintiff's default in complying with earlier consent orders." 'Whether the application provided any basis to revisit the ruling on the Corrs subpoena.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was entitled to further discovery only to the extent that each requested category could be sufficiently connected to exposed issues and was not unduly broad, oppressive or a fishing exercise. Applying SCR Pt 23 r 3 and the Court's general power, the Court limited or refused several categories, required discovery of others by class or by specified documents, and left any claims of privilege or inspection issues to be dealt with later.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion for further discovery allowed in part; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff is, by 5pm on Wednesday 17 November 1999, to deliver to the defendant a Verified List of Documents pursuant to SCR Pt 23 in accordance with these reasons.' 'Costs of the Notice of Motion are reserved.' 'The exhibits are to be returned.' 'The folder of served Witness Statements is to be returned.']