High Court: Sellman v Slater Interlocutory declarations
Interlocutory declarations are determined in a defamation suit by three medical professional plaintiffs:
(a) Mr Cameron Slater’s application to exclude evidence is declined;
(b) a version of the plaintiffs’ application for particular discovery by Mr Slater and Mr Graham is granted;
(c) the plaintiffs’ application for particular discovery by Mrs Katherine Rich and the New Zealand Food and Grocery Council is granted only to a limited extent;
(d) Mrs Rich’s and the NZFGC’s application for particular discovery by the plaintiffs is declined;
(e) the plaintiffs’ application to examine Mr Slater and Mr Graham orally is granted because they have made insufficient answer to interrogatories.
Could someone with a better understanding of NZ law please explain to us plebs what this actually means?
Its a hunting/fishing exercise it they don’t have enough evidence that Slater is a nutcase.
Waste of time and money really!!
We already know he has been demonstrating clearly that he is a nutcase already.
Was interested myself, this explains things a little more clearly,
https://yournz.org/2017/10/05/sellman-swinburn-bradbrook-v-slater-graham-rich/
By my limited understanding this does not bode well for rich slater and co.
but as we all know,in nuzild the wheels of law grind exceedingly slow and expensive.
Go Doug Sellman!