Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited

[1999] NSWSC 164

CITATION:

Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [1999] NSWSC 164

CURRENT JURISDICTION:

Common Law

FILE NUMBER(S):

20223 of 1995; 20592 of 1996

HEARING DATE(S):

3 March 1999

JUDGMENT DATE:

3 March 1999

PARTIES :

JOHN MARSDEN
(Plaintiff)

v

AMALGAMATED TELEVISION SERVICES PTY LIMITED
(Defendant)

JUDGMENT OF:

Levine J

COUNSEL :	R G McHugh (Plaintiff) J S Wheelhouse (Defendant)
SOLICITORS:	Phillips Fox (Plaintiff) Mallesons Stephen Jacques (Defendant)
CATCHWORDS:	On procedure regarding plaintiff's claim for privilege
DECISION:	See paragraph 7

DLJT: 21
(Ex Tempore - Revised)

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

No. 20223 of 1995
No. 20592 of 1996

JUSTICE DAVID LEVINE

WEDNESDAY 3 MARCH 1999

JOHN MARSDEN
(Plaintiff)

v

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

JUDGMENT (On procedure regarding plaintiff’s claim for privilege)
1 HIS HONOUR: Since approximately 11 o'clock this morning, I have been reading some material. The broad context is an application by the Defendant to amend its Defence.
2 Within that context, material has been sought from both the Police Service and the Plaintiff, giving rise to a claim for privilege by the Plaintiff.
3 In respect to components of each group of material I have read but subject to any questions of admissibility, an affidavit of Michael Brian Joshua Lee sworn 1 March 1999, an affidavit of the same person sworn 2 March 1999 and what are described as a confidential exhibits, an affidavit of Brian James Whittaker sworn 1 March 1999 and confidential exhibits constituted by some individual documents but principally, by two folders of documents, one BJW1, being the documents in respect of which privilege is claimed.
4 In respect of the subpoena directed to the plaintiff, BJW4, is a folder of documents in respect of which privilege is claimed, being documents produced by the Police Service.
5 I do not pretend to have read every word of every document but merely to have gone through the respective bundles, at the very least to gain some idea as to their overall nature.
6 I am of the view that the disposition of the question of privilege is of critical importance, as one way or the other, it should lead to a finalisation of the status of the Defendant's application to amend its Defence, thus the exposure of the issues on the pleadings, certainly to that point.
7 Accordingly, if the plaintiff proposes to pursue his claim for privilege, then the evidence in support thereof, should be read and dealt with, the evidence in opposition should be read and dealt with and I will hear submissions.

**********

Last Modified: