Abram v American Express International Inc [2001] FCA 292

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Abram v American Express International Inc [2001] FCA 292

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – discovery – where there has been apparent compliance with an order for discovery, but the intended result of the order has not been achieved. JOSEPH ABRAM v AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC & ANOR N 648 OF 1999 HELY J 23 MARCH 2001 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 648 OF 1999

BETWEEN: JOSEPH ABRAM

APPLICANT

AND: AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC

RESPONDENT

BETWEEN: AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC

CROSS CLAIMANT

AND: JOSEPH ABRAM

CROSS RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HELY J

DATE OF ORDER: 23 MARCH 2001

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The respondent should discover documents, including computer software, which record or evidence: - the procedures which were adopted or applied by the respondent in NSW in 1997 and 1998 with respect to "Out Of Pattern Spending" as described in the statement of Michelle Mancy forming part of Exhibit A ("OOPS spending"); - the nature of the spending which constitutes "OOPS spending"; - how "OOPS spending" is detected by the respondent; - the instructions given to merchants when "OOPS spending" occurs. 2. The respondent is to bring short minutes of order to give effect to this conclusion. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 648 OF 1999

BETWEEN: JOSEPH ABRAM

APPLICANT

AND: AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC

FIRST RESPONDENT

BETWEEN: AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC

CROSS CLAIMANT