In the matter of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573 [2015] NSWSC 2015

In the matter of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573 [2015] NSWSC 2015

The documents sought in the notice to produce and the subpoena could not be said in the relevant sense to be of no apparent or potential relevance. There is no undue burden on the recipient, and the plaintiffs are entitled to seek better evidence to substantiate their claims, especially in the context of challenging the adequacy of the administrators’ report under s 439A. Accordingly, the application to set aside the notice to produce and subpoena is dismissed with costs.

Parties
First Plaintiff/first Respondent: Salmat Limited ACN 002 724 638; Second Plaintiff/second Respondent: Salmat Mediaforce Pty Limited ACN 001 702 129; Third Plaintiff/third Respondent: Fuji Xerox Businessforce Pty Limited ACN 137 933 905; First Defendant: Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573; Second Defendants: Philip Raymond Hosking and David Anthony Hurst (in their capacities as deed administrators of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573); Third Defendant/first Applicant: Jason Kenneth Ryan; Fourth Defendant/second Applicant: Front Foot Project Funding Pty Limited ACN 601 976 346; Interested Party: Dual Australia Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Hearing and Judgment on Interlocutory Process
Outcome
Amended interlocutory process dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Notice to Produce, Subpoena, Relevance of Evidence
Equity Civil Procedure Notice to Produce Subpoena Relevance of Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salmat Limited ACN 002 724 638

First Plaintiff/first Respondent

Salmat Mediaforce Pty Limited ACN 001 702 129

Second Plaintiff/second Respondent

Fuji Xerox Businessforce Pty Limited ACN 137 933 905

Third Plaintiff/third Respondent

Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573

First Defendant

Philip Raymond Hosking and David Anthony Hurst (in their capacities as deed administrators of Recycling Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (deed administrator appointed) ACN 123 236 573)

Second Defendants

Jason Kenneth Ryan

Third Defendant/first Applicant

Front Foot Project Funding Pty Limited ACN 601 976 346

Fourth Defendant/second Applicant

Dual Australia Pty Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Hearing and Judgment on Interlocutory Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to set aside paragraphs 10 and 11 of a notice to produce addressed to Mr Ryan
  2. 2 Whether to set aside a subpoena issued to Dual Australia Pty Limited
  3. 3 Whether the documents sought are relevant to the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The documents sought in the notice to produce and the subpoena could not be said in the relevant sense to be of no apparent or potential relevance. There is no undue burden on the recipient, and the plaintiffs are entitled to seek better evidence to substantiate their claims, especially in the context of challenging the adequacy of the administrators’ report under s 439A. Accordingly, the application to set aside the notice to produce and subpoena is dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Amended interlocutory process dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The amended interlocutory process be dismissed with costs.