Martin v Tasmania Development Resources [1999] FCA 71

Martin v Tasmania Development Resources [1999] FCA 71

The Court refused to make the orders sought by the applicant because such an order would be unprecedented in Australian litigation and would fundamentally alter established litigation procedure.

Parties
Applicant: Steven David Martin; First Respondent: Tasmania Development & Resources; Second Respondent: Jeffrey Norman Kelly
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Witness Interviews, Orders for Attendance, Order 24 Applications
Civil Procedure Witness Interviews Orders for Attendance Order 24 Applications

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven David Martin

Applicant

Tasmania Development & Resources

First Respondent

Jeffrey Norman Kelly

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should order certain persons to attend for interviews and making of statements before the applicant's solicitors
  2. 2 Whether an order should be made under Order 24 for such attendance

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to make the orders sought by the applicant because such an order would be unprecedented in Australian litigation and would fundamentally alter established litigation procedure.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No order is made that certain persons attend before the applicant's solicitors for interviews and making of statements.
  • No order under Order 24 is made as sought by the applicant.