Hospital Products Limited v United States Surgical Corporation

This matter came before the High Court of Australia concerning an application by Hospital Products Limited, the successful appellant in prior proceedings, for an order permitting it to take a step in the proceedings or appeal, despite a six-year period of inactivity. The application was made under Order 60 rule 12(2) of the Court's Rules. The respondents, United States Surgical, Surgeons Choice Incorporated, Ballabil Holdings Pty Limited, Alan Richard Blackman, and I.R.D. Engineering Services Pty, were not parties to this specific application.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant Hospital Products Limited's application to proceed with its step in the appeal, given the significant delay and the late provision of affidavit material by the applicant. The Court was also implicitly required to consider the fairness and practicality of proceeding when one party had only just received and had insufficient time to fully consider crucial evidence and exhibits presented by the other.

The Court acknowledged the unsatisfactory nature of the situation, particularly the late delivery of material by the applicant. While the applicant sought to proceed, the respondent highlighted that they had only received significant affidavit material the previous day and had insufficient time to prepare a full response, including the potential need for cross-examination. The Court ultimately recognised that the respondent was entitled to respond to all material relied upon by the applicant, including a substantial affidavit served shortly before the hearing.

Given the circumstances, the Court determined that it had no practical choice but to adjourn the matter to a later date. This decision was made to allow the respondent adequate time to review the applicant's late-filed material and prepare its case, ensuring a fair hearing.