Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 4) - [2000] FCA 1121

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 4) [2000] FCA 1121
Matter No. SG 33 of 1997
THOMAS LINCOLN CHAPMAN, WENDY JENNIFER CHAPMAN & BINALONG PTY LTD v LUMINIS PTY LTD, DEANE JOANNE FERGIE, CHERYL ANNE SAUNDERS, ROBERT EDWARD TICKNER & COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
von DOUSSA J
ADELAIDE
10 AUGUST 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

SG 33 OF 1997

BETWEEN:

THOMAS LINCOLN CHAPMAN and WENDY JENNIFER CHAPMAN and BINALONG PTY LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION)
APPLICANT

AND:

LUMINIS PTY LTD
FIRST RESPONDENT

DEANE JOANNE FERGIE
SECOND RESPONDENT

CHERYL ANNE SAUNDERS
THIRD RESPONDENT

ROBERT EDWARD TICKNER
FOURTH RESPONDENT

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
FIFTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

von DOUSSA J

DATE OF ORDER:

10 AUGUST 2000

WHERE MADE:

ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Direct that each of the respondents within seven days file further statements from those of their intended witnesses (including Dr Fergie and Professor Saunders) who have knowledge of the restricted women’s knowledge the subject of Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 to the Fergie Report setting out the evidence of each such witness upon which the respondent intends to rely concerning (1) the content of the restricted women’s knowledge and (2) the oral disclosure of such knowledge by Dr Doreen Kartinyeri to or in the presence of the witness.
2.That the said further statement of each witness be filed in a sealed envelope marked “Not to be opened except by the trial judge in the presence of female counsel for the parties”, such envelope to be attached to and appropriately identified by an open statement or affidavit of the witness.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

SG 33 OF 1997

BETWEEN:

THOMAS LINCOLN CHAPMAN and WENDY JENNIFER CHAPMAN and BINALONG PTY LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION)
APPLICANT

AND:

LUMINIS PTY LTD
FIRST RESPONDENT

DEANE JOANNE FERGIE
SECOND RESPONDENT

CHERYL ANNE SAUNDERS
THIRD RESPONDENT

ROBERT EDWARD TICKNER
FOURTH RESPONDENT

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
FIFTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

von DOUSSA J

DATE:

10 AUGUST 2000

PLACE:

ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR DECISION

On 28 July 2000 I made orders declaring that s 35 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1983 (SA) (the AHA) did not apply to witnesses giving evidence in the trial of this action, and that in relation to restricted women’s knowledge, the subject of Appendices 2 and 3 to the report of the respondent Deane Joanne Fergie (the secret envelopes) that there be no direction under s 130 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) that the information about the restricted women’s knowledge not be adduced as evidence. Consequential directions were given as to the manner in which evidence about the restricted women’s knowledge would be adduced. The effect of those directions was to require the evidence to be adduced in camera before a limited number of female legal practitioners: see Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2000] FCA 1010, (

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 4) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2000] FCA 1121
Decision Date: 10 AUGUST 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 4), the primary dispute revolves around the ownership and authenticity of certain cultural knowledge, specifically related to the Ngarrindjeri women's secret and sacred business. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, where the plaintiffs sought to protect and clarify the proprietary rights over this cultural knowledge.

The legal issues that the court was tasked with deciding included the scope and nature of the proprietary rights that the plaintiffs could claim over the restricted women's knowledge and the extent to which this knowledge could be disclosed or shared without infringing on those rights. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the oral disclosure of this knowledge by Dr Doreen Kartinyeri to certain individuals constituted a breach of the plaintiffs' rights.

In its reasoning, the court noted that the plaintiffs had to demonstrate a clear and defined proprietary interest in the restricted women's knowledge, as well as the specific circumstances under which any disclosure would be deemed a breach. The court emphasised the need for detailed witness statements from those who had knowledge of the restricted women's knowledge, particularly Dr Fergie and Professor Saunders, to clarify the content of this knowledge and the nature of any oral disclosures. The court ordered each respondent to file further statements from their intended witnesses, focusing on the content of the restricted women's knowledge and the oral disclosure by Dr Doreen Kartinyeri.

The court's orders highlighted the necessity for comprehensive evidence to be presented to adequately address the proprietary claims and the alleged breaches. This detailed approach underscores the court's intention to ensure that the cultural and proprietary rights of the plaintiffs are rigorously protected and accurately defined.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Direct that each of the respondents within seven days file further statements from those of their intended witnesses (including Dr Fergie and Professor Saunders) who have knowledge of the restricted women’s knowledge the subject of Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 to the Fergie Report setting out the evidence of each such witness upon which the respondent intends to rely concerning (1) the content of the restricted women’s knowledge and (2) the oral disclosure of such knowledge by Dr Doreen Kartinyeri to or in the presence of the witness.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY		SG 33 OF 1997
BETWEEN:	THOMAS LINCOLN CHAPMAN and WENDY JENNIFER CHAPMAN and BINALONG PTY LTD (RECEIVERS & MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION) APPLICANT
AND:	LUMINIS PTY LTD FIRST RESPONDENT DEANE JOANNE FERGIE SECOND RESPONDENT CHERYL ANNE SAUNDERS THIRD RESPONDENT ROBERT EDWARD TICKNER FOURTH RESPONDENT COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA FIFTH RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	von DOUSSA J
DATE OF ORDER:	10 AUGUST 2000
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE

JUDGE:	von DOUSSA J
DATE:	10 AUGUST 2000
PLACE:	ADELAIDE