Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Air New Zealand Limited (No 1) [2012] FCA 1355 Citation: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Air New Zealand Limited (No 1) [2012] FCA 1355
Parties: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v AIR NEW ZEALAND LIMITED (ARBN 000 312 685) AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v P.T. GARUDA INDONESIA LTD (ARBN 000 861 165)
File numbers: NSD 534 of 2010 NSD 955 of 2009
Judge: PERRAM J
Date of judgment: 30 November 2012
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – Admissibility – relevance – whether documents relevant to case as pleaded EVIDENCE – Admissibility – relevance – whether documents concerning alleged conspirators not at trial are relevant to the allegations made against those who are – whether use of such documents is coincidence reasoning – discussion of the matters that such documents might be used to prove EVIDENCE – Admissibility – business records – whether minutes of meetings of an organisation that represents businesses are business records of the businesses or, alternatively, the organisation – whether representations made therein are made 'in the course of, or for the purposes of, the business' of each member business or, alternatively, of the organisation – whether document must belong to the entity to whose business the document relates – whether minutes discovered on the computer networks of a business are 'belonging to or kept by' the business EVIDENCE – Admissibility – business records – whether statements of opinion in business records are admissible EVIDENCE – Admissibility – relevance – authenticity – whether document's authenticity must be proved for the document to be admissible – whether inferences as to authenticity may be drawn from the document itself – whether National Australia Bank v Rusu (1999) 47 NSWLR 309 should be followed EVIDENCE – Admissibility – business records – whether representation made 'on the basis of information directly or indirectly supplied by a person who had or might reasonably be supposed to have had personal knowledge of the asserted fact'
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