Xu v Cao & Du Management Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 461

Xu v Cao & Du Management Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 461

Orders for production of documents which merely 'record' the terms of retainers must be refused as they do not identify specific documents as required by the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 21 and 34. As the Xu parties produced the disputed documents only shortly before the hearing, they must bear the costs of the Cao motion. As to the Xu motion, both sides achieved a measure of success and costs should be costs in the cause.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Within Civil Proceedings (procedural Dispute) / Interlocutory/procedural Ruling
Outcome
Order pressed in relation to the Cao notice refused; costs of the Cao motion to be borne by plaintiffs and cross defendants; costs of the Xu motion to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['notice to Produce' 'discovery of Documents' 'costs Orders' 'identification of Specific Documents' 'procedural Compliance']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['notice to Produce' 'discovery of Documents' 'costs Orders' 'identification of Specific Documents' 'procedural Compliance']

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

Notice of Motion Within Civil Proceedings (procedural Dispute) / Interlocutory/procedural Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether orders requiring production of documents which 'record' terms of retainers satisfy relevance and specificity requirements under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 21 and 34" 'Who should bear the costs of procedural motions when documents are produced after a motion is filed but before the hearing']

Ratio Decidendi

Orders for production of documents which merely 'record' the terms of retainers must be refused as they do not identify specific documents as required by the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 21 and 34. As the Xu parties produced the disputed documents only shortly before the hearing, they must bear the costs of the Cao motion. As to the Xu motion, both sides achieved a measure of success and costs should be costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Order pressed in relation to the Cao notice refused; costs of the Cao motion to be borne by plaintiffs and cross defendants; costs of the Xu motion to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['The order finally pressed in relation to the Cao notice must be refused.' 'The costs of the Cao motion must be borne by the plaintiffs and cross defendants, as agreed or assessed.' 'The costs of the Xu motion are to be costs in the cause.']