IDOPORT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED AND 8 ORS; IDOPORT PTY LTD "JMG" & MARKET HOLDINGS PTY LTD v DONALD ROBERT ARGUS; IDOPORT PTY LTD "JMG" v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LTD [13] [2000] NSWSC 1140

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : IDOPORT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED AND 8 ORS; IDOPORT PTY LTD "JMG" & MARKET HOLDINGS PTY LTD v DONALD ROBERT ARGUS; IDOPORT PTY LTD "JMG" v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LTD [13] [2000] NSWSC 1140 revised - 20/12/2000 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 50113/98; 50026/99; 3991/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 14/11/00 - 16/11/00, 20/11/00 - 23 /11/00, 27/11/00, 28/11/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 7 December 2000

Idoport Pty Ltd (Plaintiff) PARTIES : Market Holdings Pty Ltd (Plaintiff) National Australia Bank Limited (Defendant) Donald Robert Argus (Defendant) JUDGMENT OF : Einstein J

COUNSEL : JJ Garnsey QC, RC Titterton, R Alkadamani (Plaintiffs) JR Sackar QC, JA Halley (Defendants) SOLICITORS : Withnell Hetherington (Plaintiffs) Freehill Hollingdale & Page (Defendants) CATCHWORDS : Practice and Procedure - Leave to permit the reading of statements filed out of time - regulatory evidence - evidence of technical requirements and timing CASES CITED : Shekleton-Barden v Hogan (McLelland J, 13 June 1985, unreported) DECISION : Statements permitted to be read on terms

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION - COMMERCIAL LIST

EINSTEIN J

Thursday 7 December 2000

50113/98 IDOPORT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED & 8 ORS

50026/99 IDOPORT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v DONALD ROBERT ARGUS

3991/00 IDOPORT PTY LIMITED ("JMG") v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK

JUDGMENT - Further Defendant's Statements served September-October 2000 in so far as dealing with: (a) regulatory materials (b) technical requirements and timing 1 There is before the court an amended Notice of Motion filed by the plaintiffs on 16 November 2000. The motion seeks the following relief: 1. That the orders of Einstein J made 28 June 2000 be vacated and leave to the Defendants to file and serve the statements in Schedule 1 hereto filed on behalf of the Defendants be withdrawn and that the statements be removed from Court file. 2. Alternatively to order 1, as to such of the statements in Schedule 1 hereto filed on behalf of the Defendants as the Court may determine, that the orders of Einstein J made 28 June 2000 and 14 July 2000 be vacated and leave to the Defendants to file and serve those statements be withdrawn and that the statements be removed from Court file. 3. Alternatively to orders 1 and 2, that the Defendants be required to explain on affidavit why each of the statements in Schedule 1 was not filed and served in answer to the plaintiffs statements in chief, with reference to the contents of each statement. 4. Alternatively to orders 1, and 2, as to the statements in Schedule 1 hereto filed on behalf of the Defendants, that the Defendants pay the Plaintiffs' costs of and incidental to obtaining and filing witness statements in response to those statements, and the cross-examination of the plaintiffs' witnesses upon or in relation to those statements. 5. Alternatively to orders 1, 2 and 3, as to such of the statements in Schedule 1 hereto filed on behalf of the Defendants as the Court may determine, that the Defendants pay the Plaintiffs' costs of and incidental to obtaining and filing witness statements in response to those statements, and the cross-examination of the plaintiffs' witnesses upon or in relation to those statements. 6. Alternatively to order 1 and in addition to order 2 above, that should the Defendants succeed in whole or in part upon an issue as to causation or damages by reason wholly or partly of the evidence in such of the statements in Schedule 1 hereto as are not subject to order 2, that the Defendants pay the Plaintiffs' costs of and incidental to the proceedings in respect of that issue 7. Costs.