Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Aucare Dairy (Aust) Pty Ltd v Huang [2017] FCA 746 File number: VID 674 of 2016
Judge: O'CALLAGHAN J
Date of judgment: 3 July 2017
Catchwords: PRIVILEGE – legal professional privilege – exception where communications sought to be protected were made in furtherance of an illegal object – application for inspection of documents in respect of which a claim for legal professional privilege made – application granted
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
Cases cited: Freeman v Health Insurance Commission (1997) 78 FCR 91 Gartner v Carter; In the matter of Gartner Wines Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 258 In the Matter of ACN 005 408 462 Pty Ltd (formerly TEAC Australia Pty Ltd) [2008] FCA 964
Date of hearing: 27 June 2017
Registry: Victoria
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Corporations and Corporate Insolvency
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 66
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr T Duggan SC and Mr J Teague
Solicitor for the Applicants: Xiao Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr D B Clough
Solicitor for the Respondents: Taurus Lawyers
ORDERS VID 674 of 2016
BETWEEN: AUCARE DAIRY (AUST) PTY LTD First Applicant
YANFENG BAI Second Applicant
AND: YUNLING HUANG (and others named in the Schedule) First Respondent
JUDGE: O'CALLAGHAN J DATE OF ORDER: 3 July 2017
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Pursuant to rule 20.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the respondents produce electronically for inspection the documents over which a claim of privilege is made by the respondents, being: (a) documents 1 to 58 in a list of documents of the first respondent filed on 27 January 2017 at 4.19.09 pm; (b) documents 33 to 39 in a list of documents of the first respondent filed on 27 January 2017 at 4.19.10 pm; and (c) documents 186 to 188 in a list of documents of the third respondent filed on 27 January 2017 at 4.19.11 pm. 2. The respondents pay the applicants' costs of and incidental to the applicants' interlocutory application dated 27 January 2017. 3. Liberty to apply. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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