Limitations regarding the use of quotes
The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
This was an application by the defendants for an order that the plaintiff serve further answers to their interrogatories. The plaintiff had brought a claim against the defendants alleging that she had contracted lung disease by smoking their cigarettes.
The defendants complained that the plaintiff's answers to the interrogatories were unwieldy, non-responsive and evasive. The answers ran into several hundred pages and the plaintiff had used a formulaic response to many questions.
The judge agreed with the defendant that the way in which the plaintiff had answered the interrogatories led to obfuscation and was an "insoluble impediment" to their use. He therefore ordered that the plaintiff serve further answers.
This decision is one of 5 procedural decisions in these proceedings. The plaintiff ultimately discontinued the case. See also: Cremona v. Philip Morris & Ors [1996] VicSC 241; Cremona v. Philip Morris & Ors [1996] VicSC 563; Cremona v. Philip Morris & Ors [1997] VicSC 123; and Cremona v. Philip Morris & Ors [1997] VicSC 552.