McMillan Investment Holdings Pty Ltd v Mangos [2022] NSWSC 1399

McMillan Investment Holdings Pty Ltd v Mangos [2022] NSWSC 1399

The documents sought in the disputed paragraphs of the subpoenas are relevant to the pleaded issues and may be relevant to cross-examination of the parties, especially as to credibility and shadow directorship. No evidence of oppression was provided. The subpoenas (disputed paragraphs) should not be set aside.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory (application to Set Aside Subpoena/order to Produce)
Outcome
Application dismissed; subpoenas to be complied with; costs to defendants.
Legal Topics
['subpoenas' 'setting Aside Subpoena' 'apparent Relevance' 'oppression' 'costs']

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

Civil / Interlocutory (application to Set Aside Subpoena/order to Produce)

  1. 1 ['Whether the disputed paragraphs of the subpoenas should be set aside on the basis of lack of apparent relevance or oppression.']

Ratio Decidendi

The documents sought in the disputed paragraphs of the subpoenas are relevant to the pleaded issues and may be relevant to cross-examination of the parties, especially as to credibility and shadow directorship. No evidence of oppression was provided. The subpoenas (disputed paragraphs) should not be set aside.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; subpoenas to be complied with; costs to defendants.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion filed 28 March 2019 is dismissed.' 'The documents in answer to the disputed paragraphs of the subpoena should be produced to the Court in 14 days. The disputed paragraphs are: Paragraph 1 of the schedule of the subpoenas addressed to Julie McMillan and Ian McMillan, DJ Advisory and Mr Warner...