G&S Engineering Services Pty Ltd v MACH Energy Australia Pty Ltd (No 6) [2022] NSWSC 628

G&S Engineering Services Pty Ltd v MACH Energy Australia Pty Ltd (No 6) [2022] NSWSC 628

There was no impermissible parallel process as only one subpoena was issued to a non-party with no objection, and disputes about categories of documents in discovery justified the subpoena; absent protest or demonstrated abuse, the application to set aside or stay the subpoena was refused.

Parties
First Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant/first Applicant: G&S Engineering Services Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant/second Applicant: DRA Pacific Pty Ltd; Third Cross Defendant/third Applicant: DRA Group Holdings Pty Ltd; Fourth Cross Defendant/fourth Applicant: DRA Global Limited; First Defendant/first Cross Claimant/first Respondent: MACH Energy Australia Pty Ltd; Second Defendant/second Cross Claimant/second Respondent: MACH Mount Pleasant Operations Pty Ltd; Third Defendant/third Cross Claimant/third Respondent: J.C.D. Australia Pty Ltd; Subpoena Recipient/respondent: Calibre Group Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside or Stay Subpoena
Outcome
Application to set aside or stay subpoena refused.
Legal Topics
Subpoena, Discovery, Practice and Procedure
Civil Procedure Subpoena Discovery Practice and Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G&S Engineering Services Pty Ltd

First Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant/first Applicant

DRA Pacific Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant/second Applicant

DRA Group Holdings Pty Ltd

Third Cross Defendant/third Applicant

DRA Global Limited

Fourth Cross Defendant/fourth Applicant

MACH Energy Australia Pty Ltd

First Defendant/first Cross Claimant/first Respondent

MACH Mount Pleasant Operations Pty Ltd

Second Defendant/second Cross Claimant/second Respondent

J.C.D. Australia Pty Ltd

Third Defendant/third Cross Claimant/third Respondent

Calibre Group Pty Ltd

Subpoena Recipient/respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside or Stay Subpoena

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a subpoena served on a third party during ongoing discovery should be set aside or stayed
  2. 2 Whether issuing subpoenas in the course of discovery constitutes an impermissible parallel process

Ratio Decidendi

There was no impermissible parallel process as only one subpoena was issued to a non-party with no objection, and disputes about categories of documents in discovery justified the subpoena; absent protest or demonstrated abuse, the application to set aside or stay the subpoena was refused.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside or stay subpoena refused.

Orders

  • Application to set aside or stay subpoena refused.
  • From now on, neither party may issue a subpoena to a third party without leave of the Court until discovery is completed.