Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Dr Ross Gregory Pedrana v Racing NSW (No 4) [2014] NSWSC 1218 Hearing dates: 17-19 December 2013 & 4 February 2014 Decision date: 04 February 2014 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Rothman J Decision: 1. Adjourned until the 17 February 2014 for hearing; 2. Costs are reserved. Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Dr Ross Gregory Pedrana (First Plaintiff) Dr David Russel Johnson (Second Plaintiff) Dr Allan Charles Frogley (Third Plaintiff) Dr Nicholas John Kannegieter (Fourth Plaintiff) Dr Christopher Gerard Lawler (Fifth Plaintiff) Racing New South Wales (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: TGR Parker SC/OR Jones (First, Second, Third, Fourth & Fifth Plaintiff) CRC Newlinds SC/JS Emmett (Defendant) Solicitors: Holman Webb Lawyers (First, Second, Third, Fourth & Fifth Plaintiff) Yeldham Price O'Brien Lusk (Defendant) File Number(s): 2013/372880 Publication restriction: None EX TEMPORE Judgment 1HIS HONOUR: The last thing the Court wants to do is to issue a judgment the effect of which is academic, even though, as Mr Newlinds rightly points out, the issues may have a more general application than the particular application that is before the Court. It is fundamental to the exercise of judicial power that we deal with the issues before us rather than some more general and academic issue and the issue of advisory opinions is not encouraged. 2Having said that, the parties are before the Court now. The case will be a relatively short one that can be dealt with immediately; it is one that could certainly be concluded in less than a day. If the Court were to reserve its judgment until after the negotiations have concluded, it could thereby protect the plaintiff's interests, which concern the issue of the effect, if any, of the impugned Local Rule. Currently, the effect of the Rule, at least in relation to these plaintiffs, is stayed and, in relation to other vets, suspended by the action of the defendant. 3I have deliberately avoided setting out the circumstances of the substantive issue between the parties. It is addressed, albeit briefly, in the interlocutory judgment issued by the Court on an earlier occasion. It is sufficient to say that the issues between the plaintiffs and the defendant relate to the power to issue the Local Rule licensing veterinary scientists insofar as they are dealing with racehorses or horses in training. The effect of that rule runs well beyond the particular plaintiffs that are before the Court. 4The earlier interlocutory order dealt only with the particular plaintiffs. The defendant has suspended the operation of the Local Rule that has been impugned in these proceedings in its general application beyond that of the plaintiffs. That is not a criticism of the defendant. On the contrary, even if there were not negotiations on foot it would seem to me to be a most appropriate and sensible approach, when some veterinary scientists would not be covered by any such order. 5Nevertheless, the evidence before me, which is uncontroverted, establishes that there are fairly advanced negotiations, the likely effect of which is that the impugned Local Rule is to be withdrawn. In those circumstances, it does seem to me to be inappropriate for us to have an argument that is either wholly academic or, at least on the balance of probabilities, may ultimately be wholly academic. 6As a consequence, I will adjourn the proceedings but I will not adjourn them into the list or allow a long delay. 7Subject to notification that the matter has been resolved, the matter is listed before me on 10am Monday 17 February 2014 for hearing. ********** 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. Decision last updated: 03 September 2014