Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bailey v Beagle Management Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 185 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – claim that document privileged from production – legal professional privilege – without prejudice privilege – whether document brought into existence for purpose of conduct of litigation – whether document brought into existence for purpose of being presented to other party in settlement negotiations – whether document should be produced for inspection in subsequent proceeding
Perpetual Trustees (WA) Ltd v Equuscorp Pty Ltd and Ors [2000] SC NSW 1120 referred to Field v Commissioner for Railways for NSW (1957) 99 CLR 285 applied Austotel Management Pty Limited v Jamieson (1995) 57 FCR 411 referred to Rush & Tompkins Ltd v Greater London Council [1989] 1 AC 1280 applied Rabin v Mendoza & Co [1954] 1 WLR 271 applied Pitts v Adney [1961] NSWR 535 considered PETER G BAILEY & ORS v BEAGLE MANAGEMENT PTY LTD & ORS V 435 of 2000 GOLDBERG J 26 FEBRUARY 2001 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 435 of 2000
BETWEEN: PETER G BAILEY and OTHERS
(according to attached Schedule of Applicants)
Applicants
AND: BEAGLE MANAGEMENT PTY LTD
(ACN 009 280 791)
First Respondent
B M LIMITED
(ACN 009 362 350)
Second Respondent
BEAGLE HOLDINGS PTY LTD
(ACN 009 280 782)
Third Respondent
JOHN CARLTON YOUNG
Fourth Respondent
HELEN MARGARET SEWELL
Fifth Respondent
PERPETUAL TRUSTEES WA LIMITED
(ACN 008 666 886)
Sixth Respondent
JUDGE: GOLDBERG J
DATE OF ORDER: 26 FEBRUARY 2001
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate