NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : ASIC v Rich [2004] NSWSC 1017 HEARING DATE(S) : 19 October 2004 JUDGMENT DATE : 19 October 2004 JURISDICTION: Equity JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J DECISION : Two documents held to be subject to legal advice privilege.
CATCHWORDS : EVIDENCE [76] - Facts excluded from proof - On grounds of privilege - Professional confidence - Legal profession - Particular cases - Employed legal advisers - Employees of Crown - Documents created by person having both legal and executive or administrative functions. LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995 ss 118 & 119 ASIC v Rich NSWSC 13 August 2004 White J unreported Attorney General (NT) v Kearney (1985) 158 CLR 500 CASES CITED : Mitsubishi Australia Pty Limited v Victorian WorkCover Authority (2002) 4 VR 332 Southern Equities Group Limited (In Liq) v Arthur Andersen & Co [2001] SASC 398 Waterford v The Commonwealth (1987) 163 CLR 54 Australian Securities & Investments Commission (P) John David Rich (1D) PARTIES : Bradley William Keeling (2D) John Huyshe Greaves (3D) Mark Alan Silberman (4D) FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 5934/01 P Durack SC (P) COUNSEL : No appearances (2 & 3Ds) M J Steele (1 & 4Ds) Jan Redfern Solicitor (P) SOLICITORS : Joanne Kelly Solicitors (1 & 4Ds) Purcell Insolvency Lawyers (2D) Watson Mangioni (3D)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
HAMILTON J
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate