Ng v Yanjian Group (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 1246

The original production of directly relevant documents by the respondent was not satisfactory, justifying further discovery and an order for the respondent to pay the applicant’s costs.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 04 November 2013
Procedural Posture: Application for Orders for Further Discovery / Determination of Application for Further Discovery
Outcome: Application for further discovery granted; costs awarded to the applicant.
Legal Topics: ['discovery' 'costs' 'subpoena']

['practice and Procedure'] ['discovery' 'costs' 'subpoena']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Orders for Further Discovery / Determination of Application for Further Discovery

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the discovery provided by the respondent was adequate and comprehensive' 'Whether the applicant should be granted leave to issue a subpoena for further documents' 'Whether the respondent should pay the costs of the application']

Ratio Decidendi

The original production of directly relevant documents by the respondent was not satisfactory, justifying further discovery and an order for the respondent to pay the applicant’s costs.

Court Disposition

Application for further discovery granted; costs awarded to the applicant.

Orders

['Leave given to the applicant to issue a subpoena to Norton Rose Lawyers for the production of a Settlement Schedule relating to the Midtown Project.' 'Any subpoena pursuant to Order 1 is returnable before the Court at 9.30am on Wednesday, 4 December 2013.' 'The respondent is to pay the costs of the applicant of...