Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Seven Network Limited v News Limited (No 16) [2006] FCA 574 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – leave sought to amend Statement of Claim – ninetieth day of trial - whether respondents would suffer significant prejudice Held: If the applicants were granted leave to amend the Statement of Claim, the respondents would suffer significant prejudice through the loss of the opportunity to investigate factual matters relevant to the proposed amendment. The State of Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Limited (1997) 189 CLR 146 cited Cropper v Smith (1884) 26 Ch D 700 cited SEVEN NETWORK LIMITED and ANOR v NEWS LIMITED and ORS NSD 1223 of 2002 SACKVILLE J SYDNEY 22 MAY 2006
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1223 of 2002
BETWEEN: SEVEN NETWORK LIMITED
(ACN 052 816 789)
FIRST APPLICANT
C7 PTY LIMITED
(ACN 082 901 442)
SECOND APPLICANT
AND: NEWS LIMITED
(ACN 007 871 178)
FIRST RESPONDENT
SKY CABLE PTY LIMITED
(ACN 069 799 640)
SECOND RESPONDENT
TELSTRA MEDIA PTY LIMITED
(ACN 069 279 027)
THIRD RESPONDENT
FOXTEL MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED
(ACN 068 671 938)
FOURTH RESPONDENT
TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED
(ACN 051 775 556)
FIFTH RESPONDENT
TELSTRA MULTIMEDIA PTY LIMITED
(ACN 069 279 072)
SIXTH RESPONDENT
PUBLISHING AND BROADCASTING LIMITED
(ACN 009 071 167)
SEVENTH RESPONDENT
NINE NETWORK AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
(ACN 008 685 407)
EIGHTH RESPONDENT
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