David William Pallas & Julie Ann Pallas as trustees for the Pallas Family Superannuation Fund v Lendlease Corporation Limited (No 2) [2025] NSWSC 7
The plaintiffs’ notice to produce should be set aside. The documents sought are not relevant to the pleaded issues, are intended to facilitate new evidence in chief rather than true reply, and compelling production would be oppressive and contrary to the overriding purpose of the CPA and UCPR. The plaintiffs are held to their forensic choices in the proceedings.
- Parties
- First Plaintiff/respondent: David William Pallas & Julie Ann Pallas as trustees for the Pallas Family Superannuation Fund; Second Plaintiff/respondent: Martin John Fletcher; First Defendant/applicant: Lendlease Corporation Limited; Second Defendant/applicant: Lendlease Responsible Entity Ltd as responsible entity for Lendlease Trust
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 28 January 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Class Action (equity Commercial List) / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Notice to Produce
- Outcome
- Notice to produce set aside; costs to defendants; timetable set for plaintiffs’ reply evidence
- Legal Topics
- Notice to Produce, Discovery, Case Management, Evidence in Reply, Continuous Disclosure, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
David William Pallas & Julie Ann Pallas as trustees for the Pallas Family Superannuation Fund
First Plaintiff/respondent
Martin John Fletcher
Second Plaintiff/respondent
Lendlease Corporation Limited
First Defendant/applicant
Lendlease Responsible Entity Ltd as responsible entity for Lendlease Trust
Second Defendant/applicant
Procedural Posture
Class Action (equity Commercial List) / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Notice to Produce
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs' notice to produce dated 24 June 2024 should be set aside
- 2 Whether the documents sought are relevant to a fact in issue in the proceedings
- 3 Whether the notice to produce constitutes an abuse of process or is otherwise oppressive
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiffs’ notice to produce should be set aside. The documents sought are not relevant to the pleaded issues, are intended to facilitate new evidence in chief rather than true reply, and compelling production would be oppressive and contrary to the overriding purpose of the CPA and UCPR. The plaintiffs are held to their forensic choices in the proceedings.
Court Disposition
Notice to produce set aside; costs to defendants; timetable set for plaintiffs’ reply evidence
Orders
- The plaintiffs' notice to produce dated 24 June 2024 be set aside.
- The plaintiffs pay the defendants' costs of the notice of motion filed 23 July 2024.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment