Georges v Georges; Georges v Georges [2023] NSWDC 125

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Georges v Georges; Georges v Georges [2023] NSWDC 125 Hearing dates: 27 April 2023 Date of orders: 28 April 2023 Decision date: 28 April 2023 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Abadee DCJ Decision: See paragraphs 41 - 42 Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – defamation suit - discovery dispute – no issues of principle Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 21.1, 21.2 Cases Cited: Georges v Georges [2022] NSWDC 558 Hunter New England Local Health District v Munters Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 788 Palavi v Radio 2UE Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 264 The Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v Mazzco Investments Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 425 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Farah Georges (plaintiff) George Georges (defendant) Bassam Georges (defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr D Sibtain SC for the plaintiff Mr K Smark SC for the defendants

Solicitors: Banki Haddock Fiora for the plaintiff Blackbay Lawyers for the defendants File Number(s): 2022/00191186 2022/00203513 Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

Background 1. This judgment deals with a further interlocutory dispute in two related defamation proceedings between brothers. The relevant context was set out in a judgment I delivered concerning the validity of concerns notices on 15 November 2022 (Georges v Georges [2022] NSWDC 558) and these reasons assume the reader's familiarity with that judgment. 2. The dispute concerns categories for discovery that the plaintiff requested of the defendant, in both proceedings. As I did in relation to the earlier judgment I delivered last November, where appropriate, I will use the proceeding commenced against George Georges as representative or template for the resolution of the same issues in the proceeding against Bassam Georges. Subject to a qualification, the language of the categories requested in the requests in each proceeding is materially the same. A qualification to that is category 14, which I will address later. 3. To say something more which is relevant to the context in which this application is before the Court, in the 'George proceeding' there are 17 matters complained of and in the 'Bassam proceeding' there are 8 matters complained of. Senior Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the publications were made for a collateral purpose of exerting pressure upon the plaintiff in subsisting legal proceedings involving the brothers in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and the Local Court of New South Wales. 4. If the defences fail in each proceeding, the plaintiff has conveyed his intention to rely upon a vast array of matters in aggravation. These were indicated not only in his pleadings, but were supplemented by additional matters set out in his solicitor's letter to the defendants' solicitors on 14 March 2023.