McFarlane as Trustee for the S McFarlane Superannuation Fund v IOOF Holdings Limited [2018] FCA 692

McFarlane as Trustee for the S McFarlane Superannuation Fund v IOOF Holdings Limited [2018] FCA 692

Preliminary discovery was granted, limited to documents directly relevant to the specific allegations of misconduct identified in the evidence from media articles and Senate inquiry; the applicant had a reasonable belief in a right to relief and lacked sufficient information after reasonable inquiries, and the identified classes of documents satisfied the direct relevance requirement under r 7.23.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Preliminary Discovery / Judgment on Preliminary Discovery Application
Outcome
Preliminary discovery granted (in limited terms)
Legal Topics
['preliminary Discovery' 'continuous Disclosure Obligations' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'representative Proceedings' 'class Actions' 'disclosure of Corporate Misconduct']
['practice and Procedure' 'corporations Law' 'commercial Law'] ['preliminary Discovery' 'continuous Disclosure Obligations' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'representative Proceedings' 'class Actions' 'disclosure of Corporate Misconduct']

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

Application for Preliminary Discovery / Judgment on Preliminary Discovery Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant holds a reasonable belief in a right to relief under r 7.23(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules 2011' 'Whether after reasonable inquiries the applicant has insufficient information to decide whether to commence proceedings (r 7.23(1)(b))' 'Whether sought documents are directly relevant to the right to obtain relief (r 7.23(1)(c))']

Ratio Decidendi

Preliminary discovery was granted, limited to documents directly relevant to the specific allegations of misconduct identified in the evidence from media articles and Senate inquiry; the applicant had a reasonable belief in a right to relief and lacked sufficient information after reasonable inquiries, and the identified classes of documents satisfied the direct relevance requirement under r 7.23.

Court Disposition

Preliminary discovery granted (in limited terms)

Orders

  • ['The prospective respondent give discovery to the prospective applicant of documents relating to the specific categories and allegations of misconduct identified in the SMH articles (20-27 June 2015) and Senate Committee hearing on 7 July 2015, as specified in orders 1(a)-(f).' 'Within seven days parties file and...