Idoport Pty Ltd & Anor v National Australia Bank Limited & 8 Ors.; Idoport Pty Ltd & Market Holdings Pty Ltd & Donald Robert Argus; Idoport Pty Ltd "JMG" v National Australia Bank Limited [26] [2001] NSWSC 487

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Idoport Pty Ltd & Anor v National Australia Bank Limited & 8 Ors.; Idoport Pty Ltd & Market Holdings Pty Ltd & Donald Robert Argus; Idoport Pty Ltd "JMG" v National Australia Bank Limited [26] [2001] NSWSC 487 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 50113/98; 50026/99; 3991/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 08/06/2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 13 June 2001

Idoport Pty Ltd (Plaintiff) PARTIES : Market Holdings Pty Ltd (Plaintiff) National Australia Bank Limited (Defendant) Donald Robert Argus (Defendant) JUDGMENT OF : Einstein J

COUNSEL : Mr M Dicker (Plaintiffs) Mr J Halley, Ms Williams (Defendants) SOLICITORS : Withnell Hetherington (Plaintiffs) Freehills (Defendants) CATCHWORDS : Practice and Procedure - Discovery - Production and inspection of documents - Notice to Produce - Relevance of documents to a fact in issue - Entitlement to document in preparation for cross examination of relevant witnesses LEGISLATION CITED : Supreme Court Rules DECISION : Notice of motion to be dismissed. Costs reserved.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION - COMMERCIAL LIST

EINSTEIN J

13 June 2001

50113/98 IDOPORT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED & 8 ORS

50026/99 IDOPORT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v DONALD ROBERT ARGUS

3991/00 IDOPORT PTY LIMITED ("JMG") v NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED

JUDGMENT - On Notice of Motion to set aside Notice to Produce addressed to Investors Buying Service Pty Ltd 1 By Notice to Produce dated 26 April 2001 the defendants seek production of certain categories of documents from Investors Buying Service Pty Ltd ["IBS"]. IBS is the fourth cross-defendant to the first cross-claim and the fourth cross-claimant to the second cross-claim in the proceedings 2 By Notice of Motion dated 11 May 2001 and filed on 15 May 2001 IBS seeks to set the Notice to Produce aside. The only basis relied upon is that the documents are said not to be relevant to any issue in the proceedings. No questions of prejudice or oppression in respect of the Notice to Produce are raised by IBS. 3 Part 23, Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules provided as follows: 1) "The Court may, on the application of a party or of its own motion, order that any party (party B) give discovery to any other party (party A) or parties (each of which is included in the expression "party A") of: (a) documents within a class or classes specified in the order; (b) one or more samples (selected in such manner as the Court may specify) of documents within such a class. 2) A class of documents shall not be specified in more general terms than the Court considers to be justified in the circumstances.