National Mutual Life Association of Australasia Ltd v General Television Corporation Pty Ltd

[1988] HCATrans 206

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Melbourne No M68 of 1988

B e t w e e n -

THE NATIONAL MUTUAL LIFE ASSOCIATION

OF AUSTRLASIA LTD

Applicant

and

GENERAL TELEVISION CORPORATION

PTY LTD., JANA WENDT, ~~-RTIN KING,

GARY PHILIP CO"WTON, IAN RUSSELL

BRADBURY, TRANSMEDIA PRODUCTIONS

PTY LTD. TCN CHANNEL 9 PTY LTD.,

QUEENSLAND TELEVISION LTD., SWAN

TELEVISION AND RADIO BROADCASTERS LTD.,

SOUTHERN TELEVISION CORPORATION

PTY LTD., TASY.ANIAN TELEVISION LTD.

and TERRITORY TELEVISION PTY LTD.

Respondents

Application for a stay

of proceedings

TOOHEY J

(In Chambers)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON TUESDAY, 13 SEPTElvIBER 1988, AT 9. 31 AM

(Continued from 9/9/88)

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

C3Tl/1/RB 39 13/9/88

HIS HONOUR:  The application for an injunction is refused.

I publish my reasons and make copies available

to counsel.

MR J. MIDDLETON: If Your Honour pleases, I appear on behalf

of General Television Corporation Pty Ltd,
Jana Wendt, Martin King, Transmedia Production

Pty Ltd, who are the respondents to the application.

(instructed by Arthur Robinson & Hedderwicks)

If Your Honour pleases, I would seek an

order as to costs. The order that I would seek

would be along the lines of that given by

His Honour Justice Deane in the HEINEMANN case

where the application was refused and, having

regard to the fact that the applicant has, in

fact, got a special leave application on foot,

the form of order would be that in the event

that special leave to appeal is refused, the

applicant is to pay the respondents' costs of

these proceedings and, in the event that special

leave is granted, the respondents' costs of this

application are to be its costs in the appeal.

That, in my submission, would allow for the costs of this application to be appropriately catered

for.

HIS HONOUR; Thank you, Mr Middleton. Ms Morris, what

do you say about that?

MS MORRIS:	I do not have any instructions, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	Mr Middleton, do you have that  form of

direction there?

MR MIDDLETON:	Yes.
HIS HONOUR:	May I see it please.

MR MIDDLETON: If I could perhaps hand it up to Your Honour

and the directions are on the last page of the

judgment.

HIS HONOUR:  That seems reasonable. It does not ensure

your client's costs in any event?

MR MIDDLETON.	No.
HIS HONOUR:	Thank you, Mr Middleton.
MR MIDDLETON:	And the only other matter, Your Honour,

I would seek a certificate for counsel.

HIS HONOUR:  Yes. There should be a formal order which

I suggest be in these terms - remembering that

there are no documents filed in the registry

other than an application for special leave to

appeal - so I suggest an order in these terms:

C3Tl/2/SDL 40 13/9/88

that the application for an injunction made orally

by the applicant on 9 September 1988 is dismissed.

I further order that in the event that special

leave to appeal is refused, the applicant pay
the respondents' costs of these proceedings

and in the event that special leave to appeal

is granted, the respondents' costs of this application

be their costs on the.appeal.

I further order that there be a certificate for
counsel. Anything else, Mr Middleton?

MR MIDDLETON:	No, Your Honour.
HIS HONOUR:	Ms Morris?

MS MORRIS: No, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  Very well. The Court will adjourn.

AT 9.34 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

C3Tl/3/SDL 41 13/9/88