Bar-Mordecai v Attorney-General of NSW

The case of Bar-Mordecai versus the Attorney-General of New South Wales was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred around the admissibility of a letter written in the context of an attempt to negotiate a settlement. The plaintiff, Bar-Mordecai, sought to introduce the letter as evidence, which the Attorney-General contested, arguing it should not be admitted as it was irrelevant to the current proceedings. The central legal issue the court had to determine was whether the letter was admissible as evidence, particularly whether it pertained to any point of general principle that could be relevant to the case.

The court considered the nature of the negotiations and the purpose of the letter, concluding that the contents did not pertain to any point of general principle. The court held that such letters, written in the course of settlement negotiations, typically do not serve as evidence of the matters in dispute. Furthermore, the court reasoned that allowing such letters as evidence could potentially undermine the integrity of the negotiation process, which is often predicated on confidentiality and the non-admission of any statements made during negotiations as evidence in subsequent litigation. Consequently, the court ruled that the letter was inadmissible as it did not relate to any point of general principle.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales ultimately decided that the letter in question was not admissible as evidence in the proceedings. The court's decision was grounded in the principle that communications made in the context of settlement negotiations should not be used to establish liability or the merits of the case. This ruling reinforces the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of settlement discussions and protecting the integrity of the negotiation process.