Hadid, Albert v Lenfest Communications Inc & Ors [1998] FCA 470

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – claim of public interest immunity – principles to be applied in determining whether claim upheld – "balancing exercise" between injury to the public interest involved in disclosure as against the impairment of the administration of justice if the documents were withheld. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE– subpoenas – inspection of documents produced on subpoena – procedure to be adopted by a court in determining whether to permit inspection.

Sankey v Whitlam (1978) 142 CLR 1, cited Alister v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 404, cited Zarro v Australian Securities Commission (1992) 36 FCR 40, cited Somerville v Australian Securities Commission (1995) 60 FCR 319, applied Spargos Mining NL v Standard Chartered Aust. Ltd (No. 1) (1989) 1 ACSR 311, applied Waind v Hill [1978] 1 NSWLR 372, applied Maddison v Goldrick [1976] 1 NSWLR 651, referred to ALBERT HADID v LENFEST COMMUNICATIONS INC. andGERRY LENFEST and BAIN CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED andWAYNE BURT and AUSTRALIS MEDIA LIMITED and RODNEY PRICE.

ng 36 of 1995

lehane j

sydney

7 may 1998

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 36 of 1995

BETWEEN: ALBERT HADID

Applicant

AND: LENFEST COMMUNICATIONS INC.

First Respondent

GERRY LENFEST

Second Respondent

BAIN CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED

Third Respondent

WAYNE BURT

Fourth Respondent

AUSTRALIS MEDIA LIMITED

Fifth Respondent

RODNEY PRICE

Sixth Respondent

LENFEST COMMUNICATIONS INC.

cross claimant

albert hadid

cross respondent

JUDGE: LEHANE J

DATE OF ORDER: 7 may 1998

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY