hipages Group Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 986

hipages Group Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 986

The Court was satisfied, based on affidavits and evidence, that Hipages may have a right to relief for misleading or deceptive conduct under the ACL, was unable to ascertain the identities (description) of the alleged wrongdoers, and that National Postal Services and ANZ Bank were likely to have documents identifying them; thus, preliminary discovery orders under r 7.22(2)(c) were appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Discovery Application / First Instance
Outcome
Preliminary discovery ordered
Legal Topics
['preliminary Discovery' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'discovery Against Third Parties']
['civil Procedure' 'consumer Law'] ['preliminary Discovery' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'discovery Against Third Parties']

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

Preliminary Discovery Application / First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the requirements for preliminary discovery under r 7.22 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) are satisfied' 'Whether the applicants may have a right to relief for misleading or deceptive conduct under s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law' 'Whether the applicants are unable to ascertain the description of the prospective respondents' 'Whether the third parties (National Postal Services Pty Ltd and ANZ Bank) are likely to have documents identifying the prospective respondents']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied, based on affidavits and evidence, that Hipages may have a right to relief for misleading or deceptive conduct under the ACL, was unable to ascertain the identities (description) of the alleged wrongdoers, and that National Postal Services and ANZ Bank were likely to have documents identifying them; thus, preliminary discovery orders under r 7.22(2)(c) were appropriate.

Court Disposition

Preliminary discovery ordered

Orders

  • ["Orders be made in terms of the short minutes of order annexed to the prospective applicants' submissions dated 17 August 2016 as amended at the hearing."]