Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Lux Pty Limited [2003] FCA 949

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Lux Pty Limited [2003] FCA 949

EVIDENCE – exclusion or limitation of use – joint report of experts admitted – respondents' expert subsequently unavailable – substituted expert for respondents – whether evidence of applicant's expert referable to joint report should be limited – whether unfairly prejudicial or misleading or confusing - rulings Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 135, 136

Gordon (Bankrupt), Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Pike (unreported, Beaumont J, 1 September 1995) applied Papakosmas v R (1999) 196 CLR 297 applied R v BD (1997) 94 A Crim R 131 applied The Commonwealth v McLean (1996) 41 NSWLR 389 applied AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v LUX PTY LIMITED and DENNIS PODGER W124 of 2000 RD NICHOLSON J 9 SEPTEMBER 2003 PERTH

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W124 OF 2000

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION

APPLICANT

AND: LUX PTY LIMITED (ACN 054 882 852)

FIRST RESPONDENT

DENNIS PODGER

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: RD NICHOLSON J

DATE OF ORDER: 9 SEPTEMBER 2003

WHERE MADE: PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The Applicant's objections to evidence made in written submissions filed 10 June 2003 be resolved in accordance with the rulings in the attached reasons for decision. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W124 OF 2000

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION

APPLICANT

AND: LUX PTY LIMITED (ACN 054 882 852)

FIRST RESPONDENT

DENNIS PODGER

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: RD NICHOLSON J