New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [1999] NSWSC 408 CURRENT JURISDICTION : Common Law FILE NUMBER(S) : 20223 of 1995; 20592 of 1996 HEARING DATE(S) : 27-29 April 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 3 May 1999 JOHN MARSDEN (Plaintiff) v PARTIES : AMALGAMATED TELEVISIONS SERVICES PTY LIMITED (Defendant) CORRS CHAMBERS WESTGARTH (On Subpoena) JUDGMENT OF : Levine J R G McHugh (Plaintiff) W H Nicholas Q.C. COUNSEL : J S Wheelhouse (Defendant) M Pembroke S.C. (Corrs Chambers Westgarth) Phillips Fox (Plaintiff) SOLICITORS : Mallesons Stephen Jaques (Defendant) Corrs Chambers Westgarth (On Subpoena) CATCHWORDS : T1384: Evidence on Corrs application re subpoena DECISION : See paragraph 3 DLJT: 37(a) (Ex Tempore - Revised) THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION DEFAMATION LIST No. 20223 of 1995 No. 20592 of 1996 JUSTICE DAVID LEVINE MONDAY 3 MAY 1999 JOHN MARSDEN (Plaintiff) v AMALGAMATED TELEVISION SERVICES PTY LIMITED ACN 000 145 246 (Defendant) CORRS CHAMBERS WESTGARTH (On Subpoena) JUDGMENT (T1384: Evidence on Corrs application re subpoena) 1 HIS HONOUR: On 28 April, (T1247.5), I ordered that such evidence as is relevant in the application by Corrs in respect of the subpoena will be evidence in the substantive application by the defendant to amend. 2 For reasons which I will later publish, I do not propose to vary that position. The evidence which is for the disposition of the application by Corrs will be limited to the evidence I have heard in support of it, that is evidence by affidavit and oral evidence in that application. 3 In relation to the resolution of that application, there was a suggestion that I might make the order and give reasons later. I have absolutely no intention of taking that course and I will reserve my decision. That will be decided when I decide it and it will be handed down as soon as possible. ********** Last Modified: DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.