Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Pratt (No 2) [2008] FCA 1833

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Pratt (No 2) [2008] FCA 1833

The admissibility questions concerning the four identified documents were suitable for separate resolution before trial under s 189 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and O 29. Separate questions based on law, prosecutorial duty or public policy were not formulated because the relevant matters could be addressed through the Evidence Act questions. Questions concerning two further alleged admissions were deferred because they postdated the settlement agreement and might involve different considerations. Corroboration questions were not included because they were distinct from the agreed evidentiary issues, might not arise, and would not quell the ultimate controversy without further rulings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding Concerning Alleged False or Misleading Evidence Under S 155 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) / Formulation of Questions for Separate Resolution Before Trial Pursuant to S 189 of the Evidence Act 1995 (cth) and O 29 of the Rules of This Court
Outcome
Questions formulated for separate resolution; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Admissions' 'separate Questions' 'voir Dire' 'unfair Prejudice' 'improperly Obtained Evidence' 'corroboration']
['evidence' 'criminal Procedure' 'competition and Consumer Law'] ['admissibility of Admissions' 'separate Questions' 'voir Dire' 'unfair Prejudice' 'improperly Obtained Evidence' 'corroboration']

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

Criminal Proceeding Concerning Alleged False or Misleading Evidence Under S 155 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) / Formulation of Questions for Separate Resolution Before Trial Pursuant to S 189 of the Evidence Act 1995 (cth) and O 29 of the Rules of This Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Revised Form of Proposed Order, the Penalty Statement, the relevant paragraphs of the Agreed Statement of Facts and the relevant paragraphs of the Further Amended Defence should be the subject of separate questions about admissibility under ss 81, 82(b), 87 or 88 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth).' 'Whether any prima facie admissible documents may be inadmissible under s 85(2) or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), or excluded under ss 90, 135 or 138.' 'Whether separate questions should be formulated about alleged preclusion arising from paragraph 378 of the Agreed Statement of Facts as a matter of law, prosecutorial duty or public policy.' 'Whether separate questions should be formulated about two additional alleged admissions identified by the ACCC.' 'Whether separate questions should be formulated about corroboration for an offence against s 155(5) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The admissibility questions concerning the four identified documents were suitable for separate resolution before trial under s 189 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and O 29. Separate questions based on law, prosecutorial duty or public policy were not formulated because the relevant matters could be addressed through the Evidence Act questions. Questions concerning two further alleged admissions were deferred because they postdated the settlement agreement and might involve different considerations. Corroboration questions were not included because they were distinct from the agreed evidentiary issues, might not arise, and would not quell the ultimate controversy without further rulings.

Court Disposition

Questions formulated for separate resolution; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 189 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and O 29 of the Rules of this Court, specified questions concerning admissibility and possible exclusion of the Revised Form of Proposed Order, the Penalty Statement, the relevant paragraphs of the Agreed Statement of Facts and the relevant paragraphs of the Further...