[/Gu JUDGMENT NO. sseulcReleeneal aod t.... FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) No. NG 129/90 GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: LAKE CUMBERLINE PTY LTD & ORS Applicant AND: EFFEM FOODS PTY LIMITED T/AS UNCLE BEN'S OF AUSTRALIA CORAM: SACKVILLE J. RECEIVED PLACE: | SYDNEY 11 OCT 1994 DATE: 4 OCTOBER 1994 FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA PRINCIPAL REGISTRY REASONS FOR JUD! NT HIS HONOUR: This 1s a directions hearing which, as I understand was set down some time ago in anticipation of a hearing commencing next Monday. The hearing is scheduled to last for four weeks, but I have been told that on at least one view it may go longer. The purpose of the directions hearing was to deal with any outstanding matters that may need resolution before the hearing commences. The first matter concerns directions that were made on 12 August 1994 for the preparation of a bundle of documents. The directions contemplated that the applicants would prepare and file with the court by tomorrow, 5 October 1994, two complete bundles of the documents duly paginated and indexed. The orders also contemplated that those documents would be divided into sections; namely, those to be admitted by consent and those objected to by one or more of the parties. I have now been told that the bundles have not been prepared. However, the respondents propose to place a bundle of the documents they wish to tender in the applacant's hands by 5 pm tomorrow, that 1s 5 October 1994. In the circumstances it seems to me that the sensible course 1s to direct the respondent to provide to the applicants two copies of the documents it wishes to be included in the bundle by 5 pm tomorrow, 5 October 1994. That should be done by providing the documents in chronological order with an index giving the date and description of such documents. RECORDED : NOT TRANSCRIBED I direct the respondents to prepare and file with the court by 3 pm on 7 October 1994 two complete copies of the bundle of documents, duly paginated and indexed. I direct the respondents to indicate so far as it 18 feasible to do so, those documents which are to be admitted by consent to the parties and those which are to be objected to by one or more of the parties. I recognise that it may not be possible because of the time constraints to do this exhaustively. Accordingly, I direct that a further document be prepared to be handed to His Honour at the commencement of the proceedings on Monday, 10 October 1994, that specifies those documents that are to be admitted by consent and those documents which are to be objected to by one or more of the parties. The second matter that was raised with me concerns an order for discovery made by Sheppard J on 5 September 1994. I am informed by Mr Smith of counsel who appears for the respondents that the orders made on that day have not been complied with. Certain documents have been produced in response to the order for discovery, but these represent an incomplete compliance, so Mr Smith has tald me, with the terms of the order made by Sheppard J. I have indicated that 1f there 1s a further matter to be dealt with relating to the question of discovery, it can be raised with me later in the week since I am the duty judge for this week. Accordingly, all that needs to be done on that issue 1s to grant the parties liberty to apply. I will not provide any timing for that. I will leave it to the good sense of the parties to do that in time that enables each of them to be present. RECORDED $ NOT TRANSCRIBED I note that Mr Smith handed up a copy of a schedule that related to the proceedings before Sheppard J on 5 September, I shall return that to him. I shall also return to Mr Whittle a copy of the short minutes of order that were made on 12 August 1994. I certify that this and the preceding 2 pages are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Sackville. =f - Associate: la / \ f Dated: 5 October, 1994 Heard: 4 October 1994 Place: Sydney Decision: 5 October 1994 Appearances: Mr Whittle ainstructed by Blake Dawson Waldron appeared for the applicant. Mr Smith instructed by Sly & Weigall appeared for the respondent.