NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Zahos v Michael [2012] NSWSC 195 Hearing dates: 5 March 2012 Decision date: 07 March 2012 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: The application for order 1 in the Notice of Motion filed by the plaintiff/applicant on 23 February 2012 is refused. The plaintiff/applicant is to pay the first defendant/second respondent's costs. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Discovery - Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 5.3, 5.4 - person against whom the order for discovery is sought is not a "prospective defendant" - person against whom the order for discovery is sought is not a party to the proceedings - whether documents relate to a "question in the proceedings" Legislation Cited: Conveyancing Act 1919 Legal Profession Act 2004 Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 26A Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 Cases Cited: Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Western Australian Rugby Union Inc [2008] WASCA 123 Morton v Nylex Ltd [2007] NSWSC 562 Zahos v Industrial Relations Commission of NSW [2005] NSWCA 427 Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Terry Zahos (Applicant) Harry Hatzistergos (First respondent) Poppy Michael (Second respondent/First Defendant) CKZIA Pty Ltd (Second defendant) Eatstablishment Pty Ltd (Third defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr S Jacobs (Applicant) Mr S Habib SC (Respondents) Mr M Hourigan (Mr Anastasios Michael) Solicitors: Robertson & Associates Mercantile Law File Number(s): 2012/55250
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