Vacik Distributors Pty Limited & Anor v Australian Broadcasting Corporation & Anor No.9 [2000] NSWSC 809

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Vacik Distributors Pty Limited & Anor v Australian Broadcasting Corporation & Anor No.9 [2000] NSWSC 809 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Common Law Division FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20326/97 HEARING DATE(S) : 14 August 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 14 August 2000

PARTIES : Vacik Distributors Pty Limited & Anor v Australian Broadcasting Corporation & Anor No. 9 JUDGMENT OF : Sperling J at 1

P W Gray (First and second plaintiff)

COUNSEL : R K Weaver (First defendant)

D R Sibtain (Second defendant) Swaab & Associates (First and second plaintiffs)

SOLICITORS : M Martin (First defendant)

Blake Dawson Waldron (Second defendant) DECISION : Orders made see paragraph 8.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION CLD20326/97

SPERLING J

Monday, 14 August 2000 VACIK DISTRIBUTORS PTY LIMITED & ANOR v AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING COMMISSION & ANOR

JUDGMENT No 9 1 HIS HONOUR: It is agreed that, pursuant to the judgment which I have given in these proceedings, it is now appropriate for orders to be made for verdict and judgment, and I will in due course make those orders. 2 Application has been made for a stay of proceedings for 28 days by both defendants. The grounds of appeal have not been delineated, but I am satisfied that there is no impediment to the grant of a stay of proceedings arising from any point which might be taken in that regard. 3 In view of the application being for 28 days only, I take the view that the defendants should be allowed at least that time in which to put themselves in a position to argue for a longer stay of proceedings should that be thought to be required. I have in mind, in particular, such inquiry as the defendants might wish to make concerning the financial position of the plaintiffs. 4 I propose therefore to grant a stay of proceedings for 28 days, but my determination in that regard should not be regarded as an indication of any opinion on my part that the defendants are entitled or even prima facie entitled to a stay of proceedings beyond that time. I will make that order in due course this morning. 5 I will in due course give liberty to apply. It is intended that that would encompass liberty to the defendants to apply to extend the stay proceedings. 6 The plaintiffs have produced short minutes of order providing for verdict and judgment in relation to the claims of the respective plaintiffs in each of the respective proceedings. The plaintiffs have made a calculation of interest to date and propose that the interest so calculated should be included in the judgments. The defendants raise no objection to this approach. I intend that the liberty to apply, which I will provide, should extend to liberty to apply in relation to the amount of the interest calculated so far as concerns arithmetic but, in that respect, liberty to apply should be exercised within 48 hours. 7 The plaintiffs seek an order for costs in relation to the proceedings against both defendants. No submission having been made by the defendants in that regard, I will make that order. 8 The orders I make are as follows: