Fried v National Australia Bank Ltd [2000] FCA 911

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Fried v National Australia Bank Ltd [2000] FCA 911

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – subpoena – application to set aside by party not addressee – standing of party making application – "person having a sufficient interest" – documents sought solely in order to impugn credit of witness – whether an abuse of process – whether subpoena issued for legitimate forensic purpose.

Federal Court Rules O 27 r 9 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 102

Re ACI International (1986) 11 ACLR 240 at 241-242 referred to National Employers' Mutual General Association Limited v Waind and Hill [1978] 1 NSWLR 372 referred to Wran v Australian Broadcasting Commission [1984] 3 NSWLR 241 at 264-265 referred to Botany Bay Instrumentation & Control Pty Ltd v Stewart [1984] 3 NSWLR 98 followed Raymond v Tapson (1882) LR 22 Ch D 430 referred to R v Lewes Justices; Ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department [1972] 1 QB 232 referred to Trade Practices Commission v Kimberley Homes Pty Ltd (No 1) (unreported, Federal Court, 1989, Hill J) followed Kizon v Palmer (No 2) (1998) 82 FCR 310 referred to In Re Emma Silver Mining Co (1875) LR 10 Ch App 194 at 197 referred to Lucas Industries Ltd v Hewitt (1978) 18 ALR 555 referred to Carter v Hayes (1994) 72 A Crim R 387 at 389 referred to Hunt and Boyce v Judge Russell (1995) 63 SASR 402 at 410 referred to In the Marriage of Epstein (1993) 16 Fam LR 588 referred to R v Saleam (1989) 16 NSWLR 14 at 19 referred to TAB FRIED & ORS v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED (ACN 004 044 937) & ORS

VG 352 of 1998 WEINBERG J 31 MAY 2000 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VG 352 OF 1998

BETWEEN: TAB FRIED

First Applicant

EVA FRIED

Second Applicant

DAVID FRIED