Smith Kline & French Laboratories Ltd v Inter-Continental Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd [1969] HCA 34

Smith Kline & French Laboratories Ltd v Inter-Continental Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd [1969] HCA 34

The discretion to allow a second set of interrogatories and to require a specified officer to answer was properly exercised by the primary judge; no error is shown. The answers already given on behalf of the respondent were sufficient, and the appellants' wish to have a different officer's answer does not justify further orders under the Rules in this context.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'patents' 'discovery' 'corporate Officers as Deponents']
['civil Procedure' 'intellectual Property'] ['interrogatories' 'patents' 'discovery' 'corporate Officers as Deponents']

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

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellants should have been granted leave under O. 32, r. 2 of the High Court Rules to deliver a second set of interrogatories to the respondent.' 'Whether such interrogatories could be directed to be answered by a specific officer, Zygmunt Sieczko, under O. 32, r. 4(2)']

Ratio Decidendi

The discretion to allow a second set of interrogatories and to require a specified officer to answer was properly exercised by the primary judge; no error is shown. The answers already given on behalf of the respondent were sufficient, and the appellants' wish to have a different officer's answer does not justify further orders under the Rules in this context.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']