Hill v RBG Holdings Group Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 549

Hill v RBG Holdings Group Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 549

The plaintiff failed to establish exceptional circumstances warranting disclosure or the issuance of subpoenas for documents prior to the closure of evidence, as his affidavit covered all relevant communications and no further incomplete account or missing documents supporting his alleged agreement were identified. The application was therefore dismissed as premature.

Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: Derry Bernard Hill; First Defendant/respondent: RBG Holdings Group Pty Ltd; Second Defendant/respondent: Erolcene Pty Ltd; Third Defendant/respondent: McLaren Street Investments Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Equity Commercial List / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion for Disclosure Prior to Closure of Evidence
Outcome
Plaintiff's Notice of Motion of 23 March 2018 is dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Evidence, Exceptional Circumstances, Notice of Motion
Civil Procedure Disclosure Evidence Exceptional Circumstances Notice of Motion

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Derry Bernard Hill

Plaintiff/applicant

RBG Holdings Group Pty Ltd

First Defendant/respondent

Erolcene Pty Ltd

Second Defendant/respondent

McLaren Street Investments Pty Ltd

Third Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Equity Commercial List / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion for Disclosure Prior to Closure of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has shown exceptional circumstances to justify disclosure and subpoenas for documents prior to closure of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish exceptional circumstances warranting disclosure or the issuance of subpoenas for documents prior to the closure of evidence, as his affidavit covered all relevant communications and no further incomplete account or missing documents supporting his alleged agreement were identified. The application was therefore dismissed as premature.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's Notice of Motion of 23 March 2018 is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed 23 March 2018 is dismissed with costs.