Pihiga Pty Ltd v Roche [2011] FCA 240

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Pihiga Pty Ltd v Roche [2011] FCA 240 Citation: Pihiga Pty Ltd v Roche [2011] FCA 240

Parties: PIHIGA PTY LTD ACN 002 297 056, FARNSWORTH PROPRIETARY LTD ACN 007 579 017, MELUKE PTY LTD ACN 002 009 458, LISA PROPRIETARY LTD ACN 007 579 044, JOSEPHINE LEPETIT and GUY O'LOGHLEN REYNOLDS v FIONA ROCHE, JUSTIN PROPRIETARY LTD ACN 007 578 985, BERENWODE PROPRIETARY LIMITED ACN 007 578 985, DAVID JEROME ROCHE, HEROC PTY LTD ACN 008 086 904, DEBORAH ANN HAMILTON, GRAHAM DOUGLAS WALTERS, DAVID CRANSTON MUNT and ROBERT DEAN KING; FIONA ROCHE, JUSTIN PROPRIETARY LIMITED ACN 007 579 035, HEROC PTY LTD ACN 008 086 904, DEBORAH ANN HAMILTON and GRAHAM DOUGLAS WALTERS; PIHIGA PTY LTD ACN 002 297 056, FARNSWORTH PROPRIETARY LTD ACN 007 579 017, MELUKE PTY LTD ACN 002 009 458, LISA PROPRIETARY LTD ACN 007 579 044, JOSEPHINE LEPETIT, GUY O'LOGHLEN REYNOLDS, ROBERT DEAN KING, BERENWODE PROPRIETARY LIMITED ACN 007 578 985, DAVID JEROME ROCHE and DAVID CRANSTON MUNT

File number: SAD 98 of 2010

Judge: LANDER J

Date of judgment: 17 March 2011

Corrigendum: 17 October 2011

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – "without prejudice" – whether evidence of discussions in mediation between applicant and respondent admissible in alternative proceedings – scope of "without prejudice" rule at common law – exceptions to "without prejudice" rule at common law – whether "without prejudice" rule applies where misleading and deceptive conduct alleged – whether terms of settlement deed prohibit the introduction of documents prepared for the purposes of a mediation. EVIDENCE – whether evidence of discussions in mediation inadmissible under s 131(1) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – whether s 131(1) does not apply by reason of exceptions in s 131(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – whether the exceptions under s 131(2)(g), (i) and (j) established – whether evidence should be excluded under s 135(a) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth).