Drivetime Radio Australia Pty Ltd v Pivotal Creative Solutions Pty Ltd trading as Broadcast GP [2010] NSWSC 763

Drivetime Radio Australia Pty Ltd v Pivotal Creative Solutions Pty Ltd trading as Broadcast GP [2010] NSWSC 763

Access to certain categories of subpoenaed documents is limited to the defendants and plaintiff's external legal advisors and experts due to apparent confidentiality and/or irrelevance, while general access is allowed for other documents. Restricted access regimes are appropriate where evidence of confidentiality or irrelevance is shown, but some documents were not established as confidential and therefore general access is granted. Costs of the motions are to be costs in the proceedings, and no restraint on further subpoenas is imposed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Equity / Interlocutory Motion Regarding Access to Subpoenaed Documents
Outcome
Interlocutory orders granted limiting access to identified categories of documents; general access to all other documents; costs in the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['evidence' 'supreme Court Procedure' 'subpoenas' 'confidential Documents' 'restricted Access']
['civil Procedure'] ['evidence' 'supreme Court Procedure' 'subpoenas' 'confidential Documents' 'restricted Access']

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

Equity / Interlocutory Motion Regarding Access to Subpoenaed Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Extent of access to documents produced under subpoena' 'Confidentiality and relevance of subpoenaed documents' 'Appropriateness of restricted access to certain categories of documents']

Ratio Decidendi

Access to certain categories of subpoenaed documents is limited to the defendants and plaintiff's external legal advisors and experts due to apparent confidentiality and/or irrelevance, while general access is allowed for other documents. Restricted access regimes are appropriate where evidence of confidentiality or irrelevance is shown, but some documents were not established as confidential and therefore general access is granted. Costs of the motions are to be costs in the proceedings, and no restraint on further subpoenas is imposed.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders granted limiting access to identified categories of documents; general access to all other documents; costs in the proceedings.

Orders

  • ["Access to documents in categories 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 15 limited to defendants and plaintiff's external solicitors, counsel and experts." 'Plaintiff and its representatives not to have access to documents in categories 11 and 12.' 'General access to all other documents produced under subpoena.' 'Costs of...