Henderson, R.F. v Amadio Pty Ltd
[1995] FCA 66
•16 Feb 1995
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
)
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. 260 of 1993
)
GENERAL DIVISION )
B E T W E E N:
RUSSELL FRASER HENDERSON & ORS
Applicant
- and -
AMADIO PTY LIMITED
Respondent
JUDGE: Heerey J
DATE: 16 February 1995
PLACE: Melbourne
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
My overwhelming concern is to see that this huge and complex case gets, as far as possible, a fair trial. I am not persuaded that this would be in any way assisted by the further wide-ranging orders of discovery that are sought within weeks of a trial, the date for which was fixed last November.
The most that can be said about the documents discussed is that they might perhaps be of some assistance to the respondents, but I am not persuaded that they are of any real importance and indeed some of the categories of specific documents sought seem to be quite remote. For example, the mere fact that an applicant had engaged in some " tax effective investment" scheme within the last three years, seem to be totally irrelevant to the issues raised in this trial. Likewise the question of identification of documents relating to particular applicants. The list of documents does already do that to some extent. If there are some particular documents or some particular applicants in respect of which the respondents seek to clarify the position, that can be raised in cross examination. The motion is refused.
I will order that the respondents other than the 12th, 13th, 14th and 22nd respondents pay the costs of the motion for further discovery.
I certify that this and the preceding pages are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of his Honour Mr Justice Heerey.
Dated:
Associate
Appearances
Counsel for the applicant: Mr R Smith
Solicitor for the applicant: A P Kelly & Associates
Counsel for the respondent: Mr S Wilson QC
Solicitor for the respondent: Gray & Winter
Date of hearing: 16 February 1995
0
0
0