From The Mercury

Gunns claim isn't over, warns Gay
By GAVIN LOWER
Law Reporter
19jul05

TASMANIAN timber giant Gunns Ltd will proceed with its bid to sue a group of environmentalists for millions of dollars despite suffering a setback yesterday.

The company's claim against 20 individuals and groups, including Greens senator Bob Brown, Tasmanian Greens leader Peg Putt and the Wilderness Society was struck out by a Supreme Court judge in Victoria.

Justice Bernard Bongiorno found the 360-page statement of claim did not set out clearly enough the case the defendants had to meet and labelled it "embarrassing" in a legal context.

He said parts of the document were "unintelligible" or "intelligible only after the most careful and painstaking analysis".

The claims against the defendants were substantial and any trial would be a "very complex one", Justice Bongiorno said.

"The court must ensure that the only claims which go to trial are those which the plaintiffs are able to set out in a coherent and detailed form."

Justice Bongiorno allowed Gunns to go back and prepare another statement of claim but ordered it to do so by August 15.

Gunns Ltd executive chairman John Gay said the company would proceed against all defendants.

"Today's judgment by the court addresses procedural matters concerning the claims," he said.

"The company has no concerns with this procedural development.

"The claims have not been rejected, rather suggestions have been made for some redrafting."

Gunns is suing the environmental campaigners for $6.3 million in damages.

The company alleges the defendants engaged in actions which damaged it financially.

It alleges some defendants carried out action that disrupted logging operations while others took part in a "corporate vilification campaign".

Gunns also sought to combine all its allegations into one of a "Campaign against Gunns".

Justice Bongiorno said the vagueness of the allegations in the campaign claim rendered them of little use to a defendant seeking to ascertain what the case was against them.

"In its present form, at least, the `Campaign against Gunns' would appear to be misconceived," he said.

Outside court, defendants and lawyers hailed the judgment as a victory.

Senator Brown said while the case would continue and was likely to be "long and protracted", yesterday's decision was a "moral fillip for us".

"We are going to fight this case right down the line," he said.

"I believe we will win."

Jennifer Batrouney, SC, the lawyer for a number of the protesters being sued, said the statement of claim had been "incomprehensible".

Justice Bongiorno also issued a warning to Gunns and its lawyers about its court action.

"They should be aware however that the court will not tolerate laxity of pleading or deficiency of particulars to the disadvantage of those against whom the proceeding is brought," he said.

"The plaintiffs had as much time as they required to prepare it before it even commenced.

"They cannot now complain of having to formulate their claims properly in a timely manner or, as a last resort, face summary dismissal of them."

The judge refused a submission by a number of the defendants that a judgment be entered in their favour against Gunns.

The case will return to court for a mention hearing on August 17.

The issue of who pays legal costs will be decided at a later date.