Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (No 3) [2012] FCA 778

Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (No 3) [2012] FCA 778

Because Confidential PTA-2 contained confidential trading information and was relatively small, disclosure should be limited to hard copy access by specified legal representatives, parties and independent experts who sign a confidentiality undertaking. The first respondent succeeded on its confidentiality application and should receive ordinary costs, but there was no basis for indemnity costs. The respondents were required to articulate the loss and damage claim by further and better particulars consistently with the confidentiality order. Category discovery would add unnecessary complexity, delay and costs, and standard discovery was sufficient at this stage to advance the proceeding.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application and Directions in Proceeding Concerning Inquiry Into Damages for Unjustified Threats / Interlocutory Application for Confidentiality Orders, Particulars and Discovery Heard on 17 July 2012
Outcome
Confidentiality orders made; first respondent awarded ordinary costs of its interlocutory application; further and better particulars and standard discovery ordered; further directions listed; other costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['confidentiality Regime' 'discovery' 'further and Better Particulars' 'costs' 'directions']
['practice and Procedure'] ['confidentiality Regime' 'discovery' 'further and Better Particulars' 'costs' 'directions']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application and Directions in Proceeding Concerning Inquiry Into Damages for Unjustified Threats / Interlocutory Application for Confidentiality Orders, Particulars and Discovery Heard on 17 July 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether confidentiality orders should be made for the annexure described as "Confidential PTA-2" and whether access should be limited to hard copy disclosure to specified persons who sign a confidentiality undertaking.' 'Whether the first respondent should receive costs, including whether costs should be on an indemnity basis, for its interlocutory application filed 6 July 2012.' "Whether the respondents should give further and better particulars of paragraphs 17, 18 and 20 of the first respondent's claim for loss and damage." "Whether discovery should be standard discovery or discovery by categories in respect of the first respondent's claim for loss and damage." 'Whether further programming orders should be made at this stage.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because Confidential PTA-2 contained confidential trading information and was relatively small, disclosure should be limited to hard copy access by specified legal representatives, parties and independent experts who sign a confidentiality undertaking. The first respondent succeeded on its confidentiality application and should receive ordinary costs, but there was no basis for indemnity costs. The respondents were required to articulate the loss and damage claim by further and better particulars consistently with the confidentiality order. Category discovery would add unnecessary complexity, delay and costs, and standard discovery was sufficient at this stage to advance the proceeding.

Court Disposition

Confidentiality orders made; first respondent awarded ordinary costs of its interlocutory application; further and better particulars and standard discovery ordered; further directions listed; other costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Subject to further order or any agreement between the parties, the annexure described as "Confidential PTA-2" to the affidavit of Mr Paul Theodore Arns sworn on 6 July 2012 and the information contained therein not be disclosed to any person other than in hard copy to solicitors or barristers acting for the...