LK Law Pty Ltd v Karas (Notice to Produce) [2024] FCA 306

LK Law Pty Ltd v Karas (Notice to Produce) [2024] FCA 306

The materials sought by the Notice to Produce were reasonably likely to add to the relevant evidential material on whether the fourth respondent was carrying on business in Australia, which was fundamental to the applicants' cause of action under the Australian Consumer Law. The affidavit evidence relied on by the fourth respondent did not say that producing the documents sought would be oppressive, so the Court declined to excuse compliance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure; Notice to Produce in Commercial and Corporations Proceeding / Application by the Fourth Respondent for an Order That It Not Be Required to Comply With the Applicants' Notice to Produce Dated 13 March 2024
Outcome
Application refused; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['notice to Produce' 'discovery' 'oppression' 'relevance' 'carrying on Business in Australia' 'australian Consumer Law']
['practice and Procedure' 'competition and Consumer Law' 'commercial and Corporations'] ['notice to Produce' 'discovery' 'oppression' 'relevance' 'carrying on Business in Australia' 'australian Consumer Law']

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

Practice and Procedure; Notice to Produce in Commercial and Corporations Proceeding / Application by the Fourth Respondent for an Order That It Not Be Required to Comply With the Applicants' Notice to Produce Dated 13 March 2024

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the fourth respondent should be excused from complying with the applicants' Notice to Produce dated 13 March 2024." 'Whether the Notice to Produce was oppressive.' 'Whether the documents sought by the Notice to Produce were relevant to whether the fourth respondent was carrying on business in Australia.' 'Whether the fourth respondent had complied with orders made on 1 November 2023.']

Ratio Decidendi

The materials sought by the Notice to Produce were reasonably likely to add to the relevant evidential material on whether the fourth respondent was carrying on business in Australia, which was fundamental to the applicants' cause of action under the Australian Consumer Law. The affidavit evidence relied on by the fourth respondent did not say that producing the documents sought would be oppressive, so the Court declined to excuse compliance.

Court Disposition

Application refused; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ["The fourth respondent's application for an order that it not be required to comply with the applicants' Notice to Produce dated 13 March 2024 is refused." 'The costs of the argument in relation to the Notice to Produce are reserved.']