McFarlane v Thompson [2000] FCA 796

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

McFarlane v Thompson [2000] FCA 796

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for interlocutory relief in relation to documents purportedly seized pursuant to warrants – whether serious questions to be tried: that decision to issue warrants made on insufficient material; that documents seized were outside the scope of warrants; or that documents were seized outside the terms authorised by the warrants – whether balance of convenience in favour of grant of interlocutory relief. The Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) BRIAN WILLIAM McFARLANE AND CRAYVIEW PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR McFARLANE FAMILY UNIT TRUST v NEIL MARTIN THOMPSON, SALLY ANNE McDONALD and KEVIN EDWARDS Q 32 OF 2000 SPENDER J BRISBANE 2 JUNE 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY Q 32 OF 2000

BETWEEN: BRIAN WILLIAM McFARLANE

FIRST APPLICANT

CRAYVIEW PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR McFARLANE FANNING UNIT TRUST

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: NEIL MARTIN THOMPSON

FIRST RESPONDENT

SALLY ANNE McDONALD

SECOND RESPONDENT

KEVIN EDWARDS

THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SPENDER J

DATE OF ORDER: 2 JUNE 2000

WHERE MADE: BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The Metway Bank deposit book, currently in the possession of the Australian Federal Police, be lodged with the Registrar of the Court; and that it and the "Kangarucci" A4 notebook, currently included in "MFI A" in the custody of the Court, be lodged with the Registrar of the Court and marked "Not to be released to any person without the prior order of a judge of this Court". 2. Within 7 days of today the solicitors for the applicants and for the respondents together inspect the documents which are the subject of a claim for legal professional privilege and in the custody of the Court (MFI "A"), with the exception of the "Kangarucci" A4 notebook referred to in Order 2 (above), and divide them into 3 bundles: (a) documents in respect of which the applicants abandon their claim for legal professional privilege; (b) documents which the applicants and respondents agree are properly the subject of legal professional privilege; and (c) documents in respect of which the applicants maintain their claim for legal professional privilege, which claim is not accepted by solicitors for the respondents. 3. The three bundles of documents referred to in Order 3 (above) be dealt with respectively as follows: (a) they be returned to Federal Agent N.M. Thompson of the Australian Federal Police, and be dealt with as documents seized pursuant to the warrants; (b) they be placed in a sealed envelope and returned to the registry of this Court marked "Privileged Documents (Agreed)"; (c) they be placed in an envelope and returned to the registry of this Court marked "Disputed Documents (Privilege)", and be the subject of further argument before this Court at a time and place to be notified to the parties by the Registrar, after consulting with the parties as to an appropriate time for that argument to be heard. 4. Costs of today be reserved. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.