Comments

<Back to Article

1. Operating in the Tasmanian environment, Gunns could be forgiven for concluding that justice is having everything their own way. But why they chose to file this action in Victoria is something of a neurological riddle.

   I’m confident Gunns should have little trouble in persuading the Lennon government to set up a special court to hear such matters, administered by themselves, along the lines of the Forest Practices Tribunal. it would save everyone all the time and suspense.

   John Hayward

   Posted by lhayward  on  17/05/06  at  07:48 AM

2. I’m struggling (still) to understand just what Gunns Ltd thinks it’s going to achieve with this lawsuit. 

   Aside from lodging it interstate (exposing the defendants, many of limited financial means already, to the added expense of travel if they want to make an appearance at their own trial), why has it had to redraft its statement of claim twice?  Why can’t their legal team put this case to the Victorian Supreme Court in succinct terms?

   Of course, Gunns Ltd could do with the $6m or so it wants from the defendants, especially in light of recent contractual issues with suppliers. 

   All they are currently getting is really, really ordinary publicity.  They want to make a stand for the rights of corporate citizens? Hilarious, if they can’t even cobble together a concise statement of claim.

   Posted by Cameron  on  17/05/06  at  12:13 PM

3. There is no doubt that this SLAPP suit was designed to silence dissent against Gunns biggest investment…..The Pulp Mill.

   It was part of the overall strategy to ensure that this mill got up….......unlike Wesley Vale.

   It was a strategic action aimed fair and square at the loudest, most active quarters of the conservation movement in Tasmania.

   At the time Gunns launched the action they were in slightly better financial shape.

   They probably thought they could sustain the action and therefore maintain the threatening climate of fear that it created until the mill was up and running.

   Now things aren’t so rosy and with Gunns cutting back on ‘overheads’ and what not lately, they may have to also cut and run on what was always a rather indulgent and ill thought out lawsuit.

   Posted by rick pilkington  on  17/05/06  at  02:06 PM