Assaf v Skalkos [1999] NSWSC 1329

New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Assaf v Skalkos [1999] NSWSC 1329 CURRENT JURISDICTION : Common Law Division FILE NUMBER(S) : 18374/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 01/11/99-17/12/99 JUDGMENT DATE : 1 December 1999

PARTIES : Joseph Assaf & Anor v Theodore Skalkos & Anor JUDGMENT OF : Carruthers AJ at 1

COUNSEL : T E F Hughes QC/K Rees (Plaintiffs) S M Littlemore QC/J R McKenzie (Defendants) SOLICITORS : Mallesons Stephen Jaques (Plaintiffs) T Lazaropoulos (Defendants) CATCHWORDS : Defamation - evidence - whether business record is, in the circumstances, admissible pursuant to s69(2) of the Evidence Act, 1995 in the absence of the author as a witness - if admissible whether unfairly prejudicial. ACTS CITED : Evidence Act 1995 DECISION : See para 17 and 18.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION CARRUTHERS AJ

Wednesday, 1 December 1999

CLD18374/93 Joseph ASSAF & ANOR v Theodore SKALKOS & ANOR EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT - On admissibility of MFI 15; see page 1373

1 HIS HONOUR: It is necessary for me to rule upon the admissibility in the defendants' case of the document marked for identification 15. This is a letter on the letterhead of the Australian Chinese Newspapers Pty Limited. It is under the hand of James Mok, advertising manager. It is dated 26 June 1995 and is addressed to Mr Adam Baxter, Manager, Multi-Cultural Affairs, Telecom Australia, Melbourne. It is a short letter and it is convenient to set it out here:

"Dear Mr Baxter,

We write to express our concern that we have been required to pay a commission of 20% to your Agent, Ethnic Communications, in order to receive Telecom advertising in our Newspaper. This commission we have paid reluctantly but the position has now arisen where they are calling for increased commissions to be paid which we can ill afford.