Seeking unreported UK case: Hamilton v Hencke; Greer v Hencke 21/07/1995 Unreported - HCJ QB Division [SEC=OFFICIAL]

[Abbott, Kate]

OFFICIAL

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

The Australian Attorney-General's Department Library is seeking an unreported judgement that can be cited as: Hamilton v Hencke; Greer v Hencke 21/07/1995 Unreported however we’ve also seen it cited as:

 

• Hamilton and Greer v Hencke (May J, 21.7.95, unreported)
• Hamilton v Hencke; Greer v Hencke (1995) 
• Hamilton and Greer v Hencke High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, 21 July 1995

 

Further info is the case came before Justice Anthony May on 18th July 1995 and was stayed on 21 July 1995.

 

We’ve checked our ICLR, Westlaw Classic, Westlaw UK, Lexis AU and UK subscriptions and we’ve checked Bailii, UK National Archives, and general Googling around.

 

It’s cited in cases and in online documents, like:

 

• HAMILTON v. AL FAYED [1999] 1 WLR 1569
• Sands v State of South Australia (No 2) (2010) 273 LSJS 424; [2010] SASC 340; BC201009891 (via Lexis)
• Blake (Jonathan Clive) v Associated Newspapers Ltd, 31 Jul 2003 [2003] EWHC 1960 (QB), QBD – referred to as the “cash for questions” case (via ICLR)
• Chapter 45 Types of Privilege - New Zealand Parliament
• Standing+Committee+on+Procedure+and+Privileges+-+Report+No.+48+-+Corruption,+Crime+and+Misconduct+Amendment+Bill+2017.pdf

 

We would be so grateful if someone is able to supply or can point us in the right direction!

 

Kind regards,

 

___________________________
Kate Abbott
Library Manager
Australian Government Solicitor
T 02 958 17611
kate....@ags.gov.au

Find out more about AGS at http://www.ags.gov.au

Important: This message may contain confidential or legally privileged information. If you think it was sent to you by mistake, please delete all copies and advise the sender. For the purposes of the Spam Act 2003, this email is authorised by AGS.

 

 

OFFICIAL

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of information in the e-mail or attachments.