Ajaka v Nine Network Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 765
The application for preliminary discovery was dismissed because the applicants had already decided, based on information in their possession, to commence proceedings for relief (specifically, a quia timet injunction), and there was no evidence of a change of mind. As such, they were not entitled to preliminary discovery under UCPR r 5.3.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 09 June 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Procedure – Preliminary Discovery / Post Hearing, Orders on Summons for Preliminary Discovery
- Outcome
- Summons dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['preliminary Discovery' 'jurisdiction' 'abuse of Process']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure – Preliminary Discovery / Post Hearing, Orders on Summons for Preliminary Discovery
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the applicants are entitled to preliminary discovery under UCPR r 5.3 after previously commencing and discontinuing proceedings' 'Whether the applicants already decided to commence proceedings such that preliminary discovery is not available' 'Whether the application amounts to an abuse of process']
Ratio Decidendi
The application for preliminary discovery was dismissed because the applicants had already decided, based on information in their possession, to commence proceedings for relief (specifically, a quia timet injunction), and there was no evidence of a change of mind. As such, they were not entitled to preliminary discovery under UCPR r 5.3.
Court Disposition
Summons dismissed
Orders
- ['Summons dismissed' 'The applicants on the Summons shall pay the costs of the respondents of and incidental to the Summons']
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