Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 11) [2011] FCA 1061 Citation: Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 11) [2011] FCA 1061
Parties: SUNLAND WATERFRONT (BVI) LTD and SUNLAND GROUP PTY LTD ACN 063 429 532 v PRUDENTIA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 091 390 742, HANLEY INVESTMENTS PTE LTD, ANGUS JOHN LUXMOORE REED and MATTHEW JAMES JOYCE
File number: QUD 195 of 2009
Judge: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 30 August 2011
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – subpoenas – application to set aside – whether applicant used subpoena as an alternative to discovery – where documents to be produced by subpoena can be marginally relevant – subpoena partially set aside as an abuse of process
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Shell Co of Australia Ltd (1999) 161 ALR 686 applied Australian Gaslight Company v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2003] FCA 1101 applied Kizon v Palmer (1997) 75 FCR 261 applied Something Fast Pty Ltd v Patinack Farm Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 409 applied Street v Luna Park Sydney Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 95 referred to Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 4) [2010] FCA 863 cited Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 8) [2011] FCA 221 cited
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate