Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Retail Employees Superannuation Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 438 File number(s): VID 94 of 2021
Judgment of: O'CALLAGHAN J
Date of judgment: 29 April 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory applications – application for discovery – application to uplift and inspect subpoenaed documents – where applicant contended respondent had put in issue its state of mind and reliance upon legal advice and thus waived legal professional privilege – where folders of documents examined by court at the request of the parties – where subpoenaed documents were irrelevant – where application for discovery premature and duplicative – applications dismissed
Legislation: Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) ss 12DA(1), 12DB(1)(i) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1041H Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 (Cth) Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (Cth) regs 6.33, 6.34, 6.34A, 6.35
Cases cited: Commissioner of Taxation v Rio Tinto Ltd (2006) 151 FCR 341 DSE (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Intertan Inc (2003) 127 FCR 499 Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1999) 201 CLR 49 Expense Reduction Analysts Group Pty Ltd v Armstrong Strategic Management and Marketing Pty Ltd (2013) 250 CLR 303 Macquarie Bank Ltd v Arup Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC 117 Mann v Carnell (1999) 201 CLR 1
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