Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Global Gaming Supplies Pty Ltd

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,CRENNAN, KIEFEL, GAGELER AND KEANE JJMatter No S168/2012ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD & ORS  APPLICANTSANDGLOBAL GAMING SUPPLIES PTY LTD & ORS                 RESPONDENTSMatter No S169/2012ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD & ORS  APPLICANTSANDRIAD ALLAM & ORS  RESPONDENTSAristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Global Gaming Supplies Pty LtdAristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Allam[2013] HCA 21Date of Order:  2 May 2013Date of Publication of Reasons:  10 May 2013S168/2012 & S169/2012ORDERIn each matter, special leave refused with costs. On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationA J L Bannon SC with J M Hennessy SC for the applicants in both matters (instructed by Gilbert + Tobin Lawyers)M L D Einfeld QC with A C Harding for the respondents in S168/2012 and the second to fifth respondents in S169/2012 (instructed by Paul Bard Lawyers)M Green for the first and sixth respondents in S169/2012 (instructed by Bruce & Stewart Lawyers)Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSAristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Global Gaming Supplies Pty Ltd Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Allam Evidence – Tendency rule – Section 97(1) of Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – Failure to comply with tendency rule where evidence not characterised as tendency evidence at first instance – Applicants alleged that respondents refurbished and sold machines that incorporated pirated copies of material in which applicants held copyright, thereby infringing ss 36 and 38 of Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) – Email communications of...