Land Enviro Corp Pty Ltd & ors v HTT Huntley Heritage Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 437

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Land Enviro Corp Pty Ltd & ors v HTT Huntley Heritage Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 437 Hearing dates: 10 December 2012 Decision date: 10 December 2012 Before: Ward JA Decision: Notice of Motion dismissed with costs. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application to set aside Notices to Produce - adjectival relevance - legitimate forensic purpose Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Land Enviro Corp Pty Ltd (Appellants) HTT Huntley Heritage Pty Ltd (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: S Zdrilic in person on behalf of Appellants (Applicants on motion) M R Einfeld QC with Dr J Lucy (Respondent) Solicitors: Middletons (Respondent) File Number(s): CA 12/156726 Decision under appeal Date of Decision: 2012-04-27 00:00:00 Before: Stevenson J File Number(s): 07/254173

Judgment (ex tempore) 1HER HONOUR: Before me this afternoon is a Notice of Motion filed 5 December 2012 by the respective appellants seeking to set aside various Notices to Produce For Inspection that have been issued by the respondents in these proceedings. 2Mr Zdrilic has appeared for each of the appellants. I have informed Mr Zdrilic (who is the second appellant) as to the requirements under the Rules in relation to appearance by a person who is not a solicitor on behalf of corporations. Mr Einfeld QC, who appears for the respondents, has informed me that no objection is taken to Mr Zdrilic's appearance for the other appellants this afternoon but this is without prejudice to the respondents' ability to raise an objection at a later point in relation to that matter. 3I have considered the Notices to Produce. By way of summary, production is sought of documents evidencing or recording communications of the kind referred to in an affidavit sworn on 7 November 2012 by Mr Zdrilic (in which he deposes to the explanation for delay in filing the Notice of Appeal) and as to other matters on their face of potential relevance to the application for an extension of time for filing of the appeal (such as Mr Zdrilic's financial position) and I am satisfied that there is a legitimate forensic purpose in the respondents seeking the production of documents of the kind set out in the Notices to Produce in order to permit the respondents to be able to challenge the basis on which the appellants contend that leave should be granted to extend the time for filing the notice of appeal in this matter. 4I therefore dismiss the Notices of Motion seeking to set aside the Notices to Produce, with costs. 5I stand the Notices to Produce addressed to the appellants over to the Registrar's List at 9am on 11 December 2012.