Application by [24]7.ai, Inc [2018] NSWSC 171

Application by [24]7.ai, Inc [2018] NSWSC 171

The evidence established that the United States District Court had made a second request for evidence to be obtained from three further witnesses for the purposes of proceedings still on foot before it, satisfying s 32. The requirements of s 33 were also satisfied, and the agreed orders would not be futile notwithstanding that the examinations could occur only on the identified dates in March after the requesting Court's 28 February deadline.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (nsw) for Assistance in Obtaining Evidence for Proceedings in a US Court / Ex Parte Application; Orders Sought Made
Outcome
Orders sought made.
Legal Topics
['evidence on Commission' 'letter of Request From Foreign Court' 'examination of Witnesses' 'proceedings in United States District Court']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'international Judicial Assistance'] ['evidence on Commission' 'letter of Request From Foreign Court' 'examination of Witnesses' 'proceedings in United States District Court']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (nsw) for Assistance in Obtaining Evidence for Proceedings in a US Court / Ex Parte Application; Orders Sought Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application was made in pursuance of a request issued by or on behalf of a court exercising jurisdiction outside New South Wales for evidence to be obtained for proceedings instituted before that court.' "Whether it was appropriate under s 33 of the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW) to make orders giving effect to the US Court's request despite the proposed examinations occurring after the requesting Court's identified deadline."]

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established that the United States District Court had made a second request for evidence to be obtained from three further witnesses for the purposes of proceedings still on foot before it, satisfying s 32. The requirements of s 33 were also satisfied, and the agreed orders would not be futile notwithstanding that the examinations could occur only on the identified dates in March after the requesting Court's 28 February deadline.

Court Disposition

Orders sought made.

Orders

  • ['Orders made in terms agreed by the parties.']