Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited

[1999] NSWSC 411

CITATION:

Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [1999] NSWSC 411

CURRENT JURISDICTION:

Common Law

FILE NUMBER(S):

20223 of 1995; 20592 of 1996

HEARING DATE(S):

3 May 1999

JUDGMENT DATE:

4 May 1999

PARTIES :

JOHN MARSDEN
(Plaintiff)

v

AMALGAMATED TELEVISIONS SERVICES PTY LIMITED
(Defendant)

CORRS CHAMBERS WESTGARTH
(On Subpoena)

JUDGMENT OF:

Levine J

COUNSEL :

I Barker Q.C.
R G McHugh
(Plaintiff)

W H Nicholas Q.C.
J S Wheelhouse
(Defendant)

M Pembroke S.C.
(Corrs Chambers Westgarth)

SOLICITORS:

Phillips Fox
(Plaintiff)

Mallesons Stephen Jaques
(Defendant)

Corrs Chambers Westgarth
(On Subpoena)

CATCHWORDS:

On tender by plaintiff of documents relevant to Defendant's Amendment Application and Plaintiff's Application to Set Aside Police Subpoena

DECISION:

See paragraphs 8-10

DLJT: 38

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
DEFAMATION LIST

No. 20223 of 1995
No. 20592 of 1996

JUSTICE DAVID LEVINE

TUESDAY 4 MAY 1999

JOHN MARSDEN
(Plaintiff)

v

AMALGAMATED TELEVISION SERVICES PTY LIMITED
ACN 000 145 246
(Defendant)

CORRS CHAMBERS WESTGARTH
(On Subpoena)

JUDGMENT (On tender by plaintiff of documents relevant to Defendant’s Amendment Application and Plaintiff’s Application to Set Aside Police Subpoena)

1 The documents tendered are contained in a grey ring binder behind fifty six tabs.
2 During the course of submissions the following documents were not pressed: 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 19, 20, 53, 54 and 56.
3 During the course of submissions objection was not taken to the following documents: 1, 9, 12, 14, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 and 55.
4 Accordingly, the documents in issue are 5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21-27, 39-44 and 50-52.
5 Being tendered on both applications, the areas of relevance contended for include the dealings between Mr Quail on behalf of the defendant and the Police; the fact and implementation of the asserted agreement between the defendant’s solicitors and the Police; the promptitude with which some particulars were supplied in light of information possessed compared with asserted delay in the supply of others; the partiality of the Police in dealing with the subpoena issued by the plaintiff and that by the defendant; the position of the Police in respect of any application for a stay of the civil proceedings.
6 I rule as follows:
5 - admitted.
15 - admitted.
16 - admitted.
17 - admitted.
18 - admitted: this is not admitted as evidence of the truth of its contents but merely as to the fact of its existence.
21 - admitted.
22 - admitted.
23 - admitted: it is the fact of the application made before Ireland J and his Honour’s judgment of 24 December 1998 that is of fundamental relevance. It is merely by reference to his Honour referring to the submissions advanced for the parties and particularly those in writing that I admit this material to the extent that it may aid the consideration of the significance of the application and its resolution by Ireland J.
24 - admitted.
25 - admitted.
26 - admitted.
27 - admitted: Note the letter dated 24 December 1998 must be included.
39 - admitted.
40 - admitted.
41 - admitted.
42 – admitted.
43 - admitted.
44 - admitted.
50 - admitted.
51 - admitted.
52 - admitted.
7 The above documents, it is to be noted, are admitted over objection.
8 Thus, of the fifty six documents originally tendered the following are admitted into evidence: 1, 5, 9, 12, 14-18, 21-52 and 55.
9 These documents are retained in the original folder, behind their original tabs and will be admitted as Exhibit 11.
10 Documents not admitted have been removed and together with their original tabs will be returned to the plaintiff’s lawyers and marked for identification 24.
**********

Last Modified: