Bradley Phillip Ingram -v- Y Twelve Pty Limited [2013] NSWSC 928

Bradley Phillip Ingram -v- Y Twelve Pty Limited [2013] NSWSC 928

The relevant communications were to or from the companies themselves. To the extent they were directed to or emanated from the directors, the directors were no more than the guiding mind, will and embodiment of the companies. Apart from a brief reference in document 10, the communications did not concern directors' duties or potential liability and did not extend beyond the companies' affairs. There was only the companies' single interest, so no common interest privilege or waiver issue in the hands of the Individuals arose, and the companies' liquidators had effectively waived privilege.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Procedural Ruling Concerning Access to Subpoenaed Documents and Common Interest Legal Professional Privilege / Motion Filed 14 June 2013 Seeking Access to Documents Produced on Subpoena
Outcome
Access granted to the subpoenaed documents.
Legal Topics
['legal Professional Privilege' 'common Interest Legal Privilege' 'waiver of Privilege' 'subpoenaed Documents' 'company Directors as Guiding Mind and Will']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['legal Professional Privilege' 'common Interest Legal Privilege' 'waiver of Privilege' 'subpoenaed Documents' 'company Directors as Guiding Mind and Will']

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

Procedural Ruling Concerning Access to Subpoenaed Documents and Common Interest Legal Professional Privilege / Motion Filed 14 June 2013 Seeking Access to Documents Produced on Subpoena

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether directors of companies had a common interest with the companies in legal advice given to the companies in earlier proceedings.' 'Whether communications between Owen Hodge Lawyers and the directors were disclosures to persons separate from the companies or communications with the companies through their guiding mind and will.' "Whether the liquidators' waiver of any privilege attaching to the companies' documents was effective so that access should be granted."]

Ratio Decidendi

The relevant communications were to or from the companies themselves. To the extent they were directed to or emanated from the directors, the directors were no more than the guiding mind, will and embodiment of the companies. Apart from a brief reference in document 10, the communications did not concern directors' duties or potential liability and did not extend beyond the companies' affairs. There was only the companies' single interest, so no common interest privilege or waiver issue in the hands of the Individuals arose, and the companies' liquidators had effectively waived privilege.

Court Disposition

Access granted to the subpoenaed documents.

Orders

  • ['There be general access to the documents described in paragraph 4 of the affidavit of Sarah Furlonger sworn 4 June 2013, produced by Owen Hodge Lawyers in accordance with the subpoena issued to that firm on 17 April 2013.']