Dalecoast Pty Ltd v Monisse & Ors

[1999] WASCA 103

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Interrogatories
3. › Leave to administer further interrogatories
4. › Second or subsequent set of interrogatories
5. › Whether cogent reasons required
6. › Whether alternative means of proof available
7. › Rules of the Supreme Court (WA), O 26, O 30 rr 2, 4, 5
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Case management
3. › Interrogatories in context of modern case management
4. › Pre-trial exchange of witness statements
5. › Whether interrogatories necessary consistent with case management principles
6. › Rules of the Supreme Court (WA), O 1 r 4B, O 63A
1. Appeal
2. › Leave to appeal
3. › Interlocutory orders
4. › Decision of Master
5. › Whether decision wrong or attended with sufficient doubt
6. › Whether substantial injustice would result
7. › Rules of the Supreme Court (WA), O 63A

Quick Take

Under the 1996 amendments requiring leave for all interrogatories, a second or subsequent set of interrogatories should be very much the exception rather than the rule, and cogent reasons must be advanced. Where the purpose is to facilitate proof of discovered documents, a properly drawn notice to admit facts under O 30 r 2 is an adequate alternative to further interrogatories. Matters that could have been included in the first set of interrogatories will generally not justify a second application.