Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board & Anor v Macquarie Infrastructure Investment Management Ltd & Anor [2009] NSWSC 493

Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board & Anor v Macquarie Infrastructure Investment Management Ltd & Anor [2009] NSWSC 493

Applying the apparent relevance and legitimate forensic purpose principles, the Court held that some categories in the plaintiffs' notice to produce could bear on whether the proposals announced on 24 August 2006 and 3 October 2006 were sufficiently well-developed or certain to be characterised as proposals to be submitted to MIG security holders, but other categories were too broad, insufficiently defined, or sought documents irrelevant to the issues. The notice to produce was therefore allowed only in limited respects, with several paragraphs restricted, disallowed, or set aside, and production of some categories conditioned on the plaintiffs paying reasonable compliance costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Procedural and Other Rulings; Notice to Produce and Discovery / Interlocutory Motions Concerning the Plaintiffs' Notice to Produce and Subpoenas
Outcome
Notice to produce allowed in part, restricted in part, and set aside or disallowed in part; subpoena to the Chairman of Baker & McKenzie set aside; short minutes of order directed; costs to be determined on written submissions.
Legal Topics
['notice to Produce' 'discovery' 'subpoenas' 'relevance' 'oppression' 'case Management']
['civil Procedure' 'equity' 'commercial Litigation'] ['notice to Produce' 'discovery' 'subpoenas' 'relevance' 'oppression' 'case Management']

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

Procedural and Other Rulings; Notice to Produce and Discovery / Interlocutory Motions Concerning the Plaintiffs' Notice to Produce and Subpoenas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What documents the plaintiffs were entitled to obtain from the defendants by notice to produce or discovery.' 'Whether particular categories in the notice to produce had sufficient relevance to the issues in the proceedings.' 'Whether parts of the notice to produce were too broad, oppressive, or outside the legitimate ambit of the issues to be litigated.' 'Whether subpoena challenges should be resolved consistently with the rulings on the notice to produce.']

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the apparent relevance and legitimate forensic purpose principles, the Court held that some categories in the plaintiffs' notice to produce could bear on whether the proposals announced on 24 August 2006 and 3 October 2006 were sufficiently well-developed or certain to be characterised as proposals to be submitted to MIG security holders, but other categories were too broad, insufficiently defined, or sought documents irrelevant to the issues. The notice to produce was therefore allowed only in limited respects, with several paragraphs restricted, disallowed, or set aside, and production of some categories conditioned on the plaintiffs paying reasonable compliance costs.

Court Disposition

Notice to produce allowed in part, restricted in part, and set aside or disallowed in part; subpoena to the Chairman of Baker & McKenzie set aside; short minutes of order directed; costs to be determined on written submissions.

Orders

  • ['Paragraph 12 of the notice to produce was restricted to documents which record the seeking or giving of the relevant approval.' 'Paragraph 13 of the notice to produce was disallowed.' 'Documents sought in paragraph 16 were to be provided only to the extent that they were created on or after 5 September 2006.'...