Merhi v Ford Motor Company of Australia (Ruling)

[2011] VCC 490

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA Revised

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE
CIVIL DIVISION
DAMAGES AND COMPENSATION

SERIOUS INJURY DIVISION

Case No. CI-1001624

GHASSON MERHI	Plaintiff
v
FORD MOTOR COMPANY OF AUSTRALIA	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE K L BOURKE
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	24, 25, 27 and 28 January 2011
DATE OF RULING:	24 January 2011 (Revised 28 March 2011)
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Merhi v Ford Motor Company of Australia (Ruling)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2011] VCC 490

RULING

---

Catchwords: EVIDENCE – Evidence Act 2008, ss.117 and 118 – adducing evidence would disclose confidential communication – claim for statutory benefits.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr D F Hore-Lacy SC with	Clark Toop & Taylor
Mr M J Ruddle
For the Defendant	Mr P A Scanlon QC with	Herbert Geer
Mr A T Coote
HER HONOUR:

1          The defendant has claimed privilege in relation to a number of documents which can be described as correspondence and email communication between itself, its claims agent and its solicitor, Herbert Geer & Rundle.

2          These documents are contained in a file relating to a compensation claim made by the plaintiff for statutory benefits pursuant to the Accident Compensation Act 1985 (“the Act”) in relation to injuries the subject of this Originating Motion.

3          Access is sought to such documents by the plaintiff in its proceedings.

4 I accept that the adducing of such evidence requested by the plaintiff would result in the disclosure of confidential communication between the defendant, its claims agent and solicitors, such documentation having been made for the dominant purpose of the defendant being provided with legal services in relation to the statutory benefits claim and to the claim pursuant to s.134AB of the Act to which the defendant is a party.

5 Taking into account the principles set out under ss.117 and 118 of the Evidence Act 2008, I accept that the defendant is entitled to claim privilege for all the documents described by its counsel.

- - -

1   RULING

VCC:AS

Merhi v Ford Motor Company of Australia