Standen v Feehan [2007] FCA 1761

Standen v Feehan [2007] FCA 1761

Prosecutorial fairness does not apply to civil penalty proceedings, and therefore the applicant is not obliged to produce documents for which legal professional privilege is claimed; the respondent's application for production of these documents is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Michael Standen; Respondent: Justin Feehan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Penalty Proceeding / Interlocutory Judgment on Application for Production of Privileged Documents
Outcome
Application for production of privileged documents dismissed
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Discovery, Civil Penalty Proceedings, Prosecutorial Fairness
Civil Procedure Employment Law Legal Professional Privilege Discovery Civil Penalty Proceedings Prosecutorial Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Standen

Applicant

Justin Feehan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Penalty Proceeding / Interlocutory Judgment on Application for Production of Privileged Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecutorial fairness applies in civil penalty proceedings to require production of privileged documents
  2. 2 Whether legal professional privilege can be set aside in civil proceedings based on prosecutorial duty

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecutorial fairness does not apply to civil penalty proceedings, and therefore the applicant is not obliged to produce documents for which legal professional privilege is claimed; the respondent's application for production of these documents is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for production of privileged documents dismissed

Orders

  • The respondent's application for production of documents for which legal professional privilege was claimed by the applicant be dismissed.
  • The respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the respondent's application for production of documents for which the legal professional privilege was claimed by the applicant.