Raiz v Director of Professional Services Review [2023] FCA 771

Raiz v Director of Professional Services Review [2023] FCA 771

The applicant failed to demonstrate that the categories of documents sought by non-standard discovery were necessary or relevant to the issues raised for judicial review, many requests were speculative or fishing, and most documents sought had already been disclosed; limited orders for discovery were made by consent only in respect of certain documents for which relevance and necessity were adequately established.

Parties
Applicant: Danny-Glen Raiz; First Respondent: Director of Professional Services Review under section 83 Health Insurance Act 1973 (Cth); Second Respondent: Members of the Professional Services Review Committee No.1095
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Judicial Review Proceedings / Ruling on Discovery Application Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Application for non-standard discovery dismissed, except for consented discovery.
Legal Topics
Non Standard Discovery, Judicial Review, Discovery in Administrative Law, Health Insurance Act – Professional Review, Civil Procedure – Discovery – Interlocutory Applications
Administrative Law Health Law Civil Procedure Non Standard Discovery Judicial Review Discovery in Administrative Law Health Insurance Act – Professional Review Civil Procedure – Discovery – Interlocutory Applications

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Danny-Glen Raiz

Applicant

Director of Professional Services Review under section 83 Health Insurance Act 1973 (Cth)

First Respondent

Members of the Professional Services Review Committee No.1095

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Judicial Review Proceedings / Ruling on Discovery Application Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether orders for non-standard discovery should be made in an application for judicial review under the Health Insurance Act 1973 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the categories of documents sought are necessary and relevant to issues raised
  3. 3 Whether some discovery categories constitute mere 'fishing' expeditions

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate that the categories of documents sought by non-standard discovery were necessary or relevant to the issues raised for judicial review, many requests were speculative or fishing, and most documents sought had already been disclosed; limited orders for discovery were made by consent only in respect of certain documents for which relevance and necessity were adequately established.

Court Disposition

Application for non-standard discovery dismissed, except for consented discovery.

Orders

  • First Respondent to provide discovery of (a) the curricula vitae of Dr Martine Walker, Dr Debra Coleman and Dr Nedra Vanden Driesen; (b) certain administrative correspondence referrable to category 13; (c) correspondence of Ms Samantha Williams referrable to category 16, per affidavit evidence.
  • Applicant's Interlocutory Application filed on 17 May 2023 dismissed.