Murray & Anor v Wheeler & Ors [2013] NSWSC 137

Murray & Anor v Wheeler & Ors [2013] NSWSC 137

Although it appeared prima facie that the applicants may be entitled to make a claim against Mr Wheeler and his corporate entities and that they had pursued several inquiries, the applicants had already made a decision to sue the respondents, as shown by correspondence stating an intention to join them to the District Court proceedings. The Court was therefore not satisfied that the applicants were unable to obtain sufficient information to decide whether or not to commence proceedings, and the requirements for preliminary discovery under rule 5.3 were not met.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Summons Seeking Preliminary Discovery Under Part 5 Rule 5.3 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
['preliminary Discovery' 'discovery From Prospective Defendant' 'sufficient Information to Decide Whether to Commence Proceedings']
['practice and Procedure' 'equity'] ['preliminary Discovery' 'discovery From Prospective Defendant' 'sufficient Information to Decide Whether to Commence Proceedings']

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

Summons Seeking Preliminary Discovery Under Part 5 Rule 5.3 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it appeared that the applicants may be entitled to make a claim for relief against the respondents.' 'Whether the applicants had made reasonable inquiries.' 'Whether the applicants were unable to obtain sufficient information to decide whether or not to commence proceedings against the respondents, given prior correspondence stating an intention to join them to District Court proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although it appeared prima facie that the applicants may be entitled to make a claim against Mr Wheeler and his corporate entities and that they had pursued several inquiries, the applicants had already made a decision to sue the respondents, as shown by correspondence stating an intention to join them to the District Court proceedings. The Court was therefore not satisfied that the applicants were unable to obtain sufficient information to decide whether or not to commence proceedings, and the requirements for preliminary discovery under rule 5.3 were not met.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed']