BROOKES v. MARSHALL [1996] NSWCA 68

BROOKES v. MARSHALL [1996] NSWCA 68

The Court declined to make orders for the examination of documents for criminal investigative purposes as this is outside the function of the civil court; the application was dismissed and no order as to costs was made, each party bearing their own costs.

Parties
Applicant: Thomas Joseph Brookes; Applicant: Judith Brookes; Respondent: Marshall; Other: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 1996
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Application for Examination of Documents
Outcome
notice of motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Examination of Documents, Distinction Between Civil and Criminal Investigation, Costs

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Joseph Brookes

Applicant

Judith Brookes

Applicant

Marshall

Respondent

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited

Other

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Application for Examination of Documents

  1. 1 Whether the court should order examination of documents for criminal investigation by the police
  2. 2 Whether civil proceedings should facilitate criminal investigations
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded given the change in the basis of the application

Ratio Decidendi

The Court declined to make orders for the examination of documents for criminal investigative purposes as this is outside the function of the civil court; the application was dismissed and no order as to costs was made, each party bearing their own costs.

Court Disposition

notice of motion dismissed

Orders

  • The notice of motion undated but filed on 27 February 1996 is dismissed.
  • The documents comprising the exhibits in proceedings 11940/91 and 4005 1/94 are to be returned to the parties from whom they came.