Judges Want To Read Less About It

Sydney Morning Herald

Monday August 25, 2008

Elisabeth Sexton

TWO Federal Court judges called a pre-trial hearing last week to read the riot act to the Seven Network, News Ltd, Consolidated Media Holdings and Telstra over how Seven's appeal in the C7 trade practices case should run.

The length and $200 million cost of the original case, over C7's failure to acquire broadcast rights, was criticised by the trial judge, Justice Ronald Sackville, as "not only extraordinarily wasteful, but border[ing] on the scandalous".

Justice John Dowsett opened Thursday's hearing with a stern message for the senior barristers and their clients.

"Some of the remarks I am going to make by way of introduction are not necessarily directed at people at the bar table but they are made in the hope they will assist you in your dealings with those who instruct you and perhaps those who instruct them," Justice Dowsett said.

He said the court needed a list of issues agreed by the parties in advance, and warned that oral submissions should stick to the arguments raised in written submissions, most of which have been filed. Oral submissions were "not a second go", he said.

Seven's lead barrister, Allan Myers, QC, said Justice Dowsett, Justice Peter Jacobson and the absent Justice John Mansfield could "relax and be comfortable" about the level of preparation, an invitation Justice Dowsett declined.

Mr Myers said the matters to be argued on appeal had been "pared down" and were unlikely to take all of the three weeks set aside in November.

He was supported by Noel Hutley, SC, for News, who said: "I agree with my learned friend that it's not as bad as it looks".

Justice Dowsett said the judges would devote three to five days to reading time before the appeal and would like suggestions of how best to spend it. "It may be, for example, that it's not necessary to read the whole of the judgment in advance," he said.

The original trial took 120 hearing days, producing 10,000 pages of transcript and 5000 pages of closing submissions.

Justice Sackville said it was regrettable that "mega-litigation" often generated very long judgments. His ran to 1160 pages.

Mr Myers said "a few chapters" of the judgment were not relevant to the appeal.

Justice Jacobson reminded him that Seven's submissions in reply were limited to 100 pages, and Mr Myers said they "won't be anything like 100 pages".

"Our primary submissions were barely 200 pages," he said. "Less than 200 pages if you take the index out."

© 2008 Sydney Morning Herald

Back to News Index | Back to Home