Clover Corporation Limited v Tobias (No 2) [2020] FCA 1710

Clover Corporation Limited v Tobias (No 2) [2020] FCA 1710

Given that inspection of seized documents under a search order is at the Court's discretion and no discovery application has yet been made, it is inappropriate at this stage to allow applicants' solicitors unredacted access to the documents over respondents' objections. The current confidentiality and redaction regime remains, with the opportunity for review if circumstances change.

Parties
First Applicant: Clover Corporation Limited; Second Applicant: Nu-Mega Ingredients Pty Limited; First Respondent: Peter Frederick Tobias; Second Respondent: Pharmamark Nutrition Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure / Interlocutory Application Regarding Inspection of Documents Seized Under Search Order
Outcome
Application for unredacted inspection refused at this stage; orders made regarding identification, redaction, technical review, further pleadings, and case management; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Search Orders, Confidential Information, Leave to Inspect Seized Documents, Privilege and Redaction, Discovery Process
Practice and Procedure Commercial Law Search Orders Confidential Information Leave to Inspect Seized Documents Privilege and Redaction Discovery Process

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clover Corporation Limited

First Applicant

Nu-Mega Ingredients Pty Limited

Second Applicant

Peter Frederick Tobias

First Respondent

Pharmamark Nutrition Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Practice and Procedure / Interlocutory Application Regarding Inspection of Documents Seized Under Search Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants' solicitors should be granted leave to inspect unredacted versions of seized documents in categories A-D and E-F
  2. 2 Whether procedure for post-search order document review and privilege/redaction is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

Given that inspection of seized documents under a search order is at the Court's discretion and no discovery application has yet been made, it is inappropriate at this stage to allow applicants' solicitors unredacted access to the documents over respondents' objections. The current confidentiality and redaction regime remains, with the opportunity for review if circumstances change.

Court Disposition

Application for unredacted inspection refused at this stage; orders made regarding identification, redaction, technical review, further pleadings, and case management; costs reserved.

Orders

  • By 4 December 2020, respondents to identify documents in respect of which they claim privilege.
  • By 4 December 2020, respondents to make reasonable redactions for confidentiality of 1,247 documents identified as 'Listed Things'.