Apple v Wily [2002] NSWSC 855

Apple v Wily [2002] NSWSC 855

Mr Wily is not a 'client' of Brott or Surry Partners, and thus cannot assert client legal privilege under s 118 for communications with them; privilege may only be available under s 119 regarding confidential communications about litigation funding made for the dominant purpose of obtaining professional legal services, subject to demonstration of a non-disclosure obligation as defined in s 117.

Parties
Plaintiff: Apple Computer Australia Pty Limited; First Defendant: Andrew Hugh Jenner Wily; Second Defendant: Buzzle Operations Pty Ltd (Receivers Appointed) (In Liquidation)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Application Within Existing Proceedings / Interlocutory Decision on Access to Documents and Privilege
Outcome
Access to documents granted, except for those properly subject to privilege under s 119 regarding litigation funding, pending identification and review.
Legal Topics
Client Legal Privilege, Litigation Funding, Confidential Communications, Liquidators, Production of Documents
Procedure Evidence Corporations Client Legal Privilege Litigation Funding Confidential Communications Liquidators Production of Documents

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apple Computer Australia Pty Limited

Plaintiff

Andrew Hugh Jenner Wily

First Defendant

Buzzle Operations Pty Ltd (Receivers Appointed) (In Liquidation)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Within Existing Proceedings / Interlocutory Decision on Access to Documents and Privilege

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Wily can assert client legal privilege over documents produced by Brott and Surry Partners under ss 118 and 119 of the Evidence Act 1995 and relevant Supreme Court Rules;
  2. 2 Definition of 'client' for the purposes of legal professional privilege;
  3. 3 Whether confidential communications relating to litigation funding are privileged under s 119.

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Wily is not a 'client' of Brott or Surry Partners, and thus cannot assert client legal privilege under s 118 for communications with them; privilege may only be available under s 119 regarding confidential communications about litigation funding made for the dominant purpose of obtaining professional legal services, subject to demonstration of a non-disclosure obligation as defined in s 117.

Court Disposition

Access to documents granted, except for those properly subject to privilege under s 119 regarding litigation funding, pending identification and review.

Orders

  • Within seven days, Mr Wily to file a list identifying documents claimed to be protected under s 119 of the Evidence Act via Part 36 rule 13(2)(a) of the Supreme Court Rules, specifying source and terms of applicable non-disclosure obligations.