Darcy v Medtel Pty Limited

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 In this matter, the issues in substance are identical to those that I have dealt with in Courtney v Medtel Pty Limited (No 6) [2004] FCA 1598. I have been provided with detailed written submissions which I have initialled and placed with the file. Those submissions, in the light of my earlier judgment in Courtney v Medtel (No 6), satisfy me that the settlement ought to be approved pursuant to s 33V(1) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). 2 The orders will follow the same form as those that are to be made in Courtney v Medtel (No 6). I note that the respondents have undertaken to write to the 10 persons who were thought to be Remaining Group Members but in fact were not. In this respect, the respondents will follow the same course as in Courtney v Medtel (No 6). 3 An affidavit has been filed identifying the 160 Remaining Group Members who are bound by the judgment. 4 I will qualify the orders by reserving to the parties, notwithstanding the dismissal of the proceedings, liberty to apply in relation to any cost orders that any party says ought to be made. I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Sackville.

Counsel for the Applicant: P Cashman with R Gilsenan