Jasper and Corrigan (No.2)

Case

[2017] FCCA 1467

23 June 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Jasper and Corrigan (No.2) [2017] FCCA 1467 [2017] FCCA 1467 23 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Jasper and Corrigan (No.2)*, Judge Altobelli of the Federal Circuit Court considered an application by the Applicant to dispense with compliance with Part 25A of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) regarding audio recordings. The dispute concerned the nature of the relationship between the parties, and the Applicant sought to rely on certain audio recordings as evidence.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to dispense with the formal requirements of Part 25A of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) for the audio recordings the Applicant wished to tender. This involved determining the appropriate procedure for admitting such evidence, particularly given the Applicant's assertion of its relevance to the relationship between the parties.

The Court reasoned that strict compliance with Part 25A was not feasible in the circumstances and ordered that the requirement for compliance be dispensed with. Instead, the Applicant was directed to provide the Respondent's solicitor with electronic copies of no more than six relevant audio recordings within 14 days. Furthermore, the Applicant was ordered to file and serve an affidavit detailing the factual context, date, and time of these recordings, and to attach transcripts. The Court also granted the Applicant a certificate under s.128 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) in relation to this evidence. The costs for the hearing dates of 22 and 23 June 2017 were reserved, and the matter was adjourned for a final hearing on 12 and 13 September 2017. The Respondent was also ordered to file and serve an affidavit addressing the Applicant's contentions within 28 days.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure

  • Evidence

Legal Concepts

  • Discovery

  • Costs

  • Procedural Fairness

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

4

Huffman & Gorman (No. 2) [2014] FamCA 1077