Weston v Publishing and Broadcasting Limited [2010] NSWSC 1288

Weston v Publishing and Broadcasting Limited [2010] NSWSC 1288

Confidentiality orders covering affidavits and submissions used in ex parte time extension applications should be discharged as legal professional privilege was waived by the plaintiffs’ use of the material to obtain court orders with knowledge defendants could seek discharge; only details of litigation funding arrangements warrant continued confidentiality due to their potential for tactical disadvantage to the plaintiffs if disclosed.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Paul Gerard Weston as Special Purpose Liquidator of One.Tel Limited; Second Plaintiff: One.Tel Limited; Sixth Defendant: News Limited; Seventh Defendant: Leteno Pty Limited; Tenth Defendant: Lachlan Keith Murdoch; Eleventh Defendant: Peter John Macourt
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Discharge Confidentiality Orders and Related Production Orders in Ongoing Proceedings
Outcome
Confidentiality orders discharged except for material relating to litigation funding arrangements, which remain confidential.
Legal Topics
Confidentiality Orders, Legal Professional Privilege, Extension of Time to Serve Originating Process, Litigation Funding, Evidence
Civil Procedure Corporations Law Confidentiality Orders Legal Professional Privilege Extension of Time to Serve Originating Process Litigation Funding Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Gerard Weston as Special Purpose Liquidator of One.Tel Limited

First Plaintiff

One.Tel Limited

Second Plaintiff

News Limited

Sixth Defendant

Leteno Pty Limited

Seventh Defendant

Lachlan Keith Murdoch

Tenth Defendant

Peter John Macourt

Eleventh Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Discharge Confidentiality Orders and Related Production Orders in Ongoing Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether confidentiality orders over affidavits and submissions used in previous extension applications should be discharged
  2. 2 Whether legal professional privilege over those documents has been waived
  3. 3 Whether litigation funding material should continue to be protected from disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

Confidentiality orders covering affidavits and submissions used in ex parte time extension applications should be discharged as legal professional privilege was waived by the plaintiffs’ use of the material to obtain court orders with knowledge defendants could seek discharge; only details of litigation funding arrangements warrant continued confidentiality due to their potential for tactical disadvantage to the plaintiffs if disclosed.

Court Disposition

Confidentiality orders discharged except for material relating to litigation funding arrangements, which remain confidential.

Orders

  • Existing confidentiality orders over the relevant affidavits and submissions are to be discharged, except as to litigation funding material, which will remain subject to confidentiality.