The right to interrogate extends to any facts material to supporting a party's case, not merely facts directly in issue. The prospect of exchanged witness statements does not displace the need for interrogatories where a plaintiff requires evidence to prove his case, particularly where statements may not be supplied until close to the hearing date. Interrogatories directed to establishing malice in an assault claim are relevant to both liability and damages and are not 'fishing'.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.