Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd [1999] NSWSC 121

Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd [1999] NSWSC 121

There is no basis other than mere forensic advantage to depart from the usual order of addresses, and legislative changes have instituted a separate jury trial for s.7A questions; thus, the application for directions under Pt 34 r 6(1) is declined.

Parties
Plaintiff: John Marsden; Defendant: Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Order of Addresses
Outcome
Application for directions under Pt 34 r 6(1) declined.
Legal Topics
Order of Addresses, Jury Procedure, Directions to Counsel
Defamation Order of Addresses Jury Procedure Directions to Counsel

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Marsden

Plaintiff

Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Order of Addresses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should depart from the usual order of addresses as prescribed by SCR Pt 34 r 6(5) in a post-1995 defamation action with jury trial under s.7A of the Defamation Act 1974

Ratio Decidendi

There is no basis other than mere forensic advantage to depart from the usual order of addresses, and legislative changes have instituted a separate jury trial for s.7A questions; thus, the application for directions under Pt 34 r 6(1) is declined.

Court Disposition

Application for directions under Pt 34 r 6(1) declined.

Orders

  • No directions made under Pt 34 r 6(1).