Martyn John Prowse v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 139

Martyn John Prowse v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 139

The interrogatories sought were allowed only to the extent they were relevant to issues in the defamation proceedings, including the truth of the pleaded imputation and potentially probative similar complaints, while overlapping discovery categories were rejected because both discovery and interrogatories were not needed for the same issues; the final interrogatory was allowed but confined to the date of the particular complaint.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings / Rulings on Interlocutory Processes Concerning Discovery and Interrogatories
Outcome
Rulings made on interrogatories and discovery categories; plaintiff granted leave to interrogate in accordance with the rulings.
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'discovery' 'contextual Imputations' 'court Annexed Mediation']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['interrogatories' 'discovery' 'contextual Imputations' 'court Annexed Mediation']

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 / Rulings on Interlocutory Processes Concerning Discovery and Interrogatories

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether interrogatory 29 concerning the expenses and revenue of the plaintiff's business should be allowed and whether the corresponding discovery category should be rejected." 'Whether interrogatory 30 and the corresponding discovery category concerning complaints received by the plaintiff about his business should be allowed.' 'Whether an interrogatory about when the plaintiff or his employees were in the area of the particular complaint should be allowed and confined by date.']

Ratio Decidendi

The interrogatories sought were allowed only to the extent they were relevant to issues in the defamation proceedings, including the truth of the pleaded imputation and potentially probative similar complaints, while overlapping discovery categories were rejected because both discovery and interrogatories were not needed for the same issues; the final interrogatory was allowed but confined to the date of the particular complaint.

Court Disposition

Rulings made on interrogatories and discovery categories; plaintiff granted leave to interrogate in accordance with the rulings.

Orders

  • ['Interrogatory 29 allowed; corresponding category for discovery, category 3(d), rejected.' 'Interrogatory 30 allowed; corresponding category for discovery, category 5, rejected; the date of interrogatory 30 confined to January 2012 to the end of October 2013.' 'The interrogatory directed to ascertaining the date on...