Fraietta v Roads and Maritime Services [2016] NSWLEC 52

Fraietta v Roads and Maritime Services [2016] NSWLEC 52

The motion was dismissed because the respondent had conflated the Pt 21 Notice to Produce procedure with the distinct Pt 34 Notice to Produce to the Court procedure, and because there was no proper evidentiary basis showing that the documents sought to be produced to the Court were too broad.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Proceedings / Respondent's Notice of Motion Seeking to Set Aside the Applicant's Notice to Produce to the Court Filed on 7 April 2016
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed; costs reserved; matter stood over to 29 April 2016.
Legal Topics
['production of Documents' 'notice to Produce' 'notice to Produce to the Court' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules']
['civil Procedure'] ['production of Documents' 'notice to Produce' 'notice to Produce to the Court' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules']

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

Class 3 Proceedings / Respondent's Notice of Motion Seeking to Set Aside the Applicant's Notice to Produce to the Court Filed on 7 April 2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the document filed and served by the applicant should be treated as a Notice to Produce under Pt 21 or a Notice to Produce to the Court under Pt 34 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.' 'Whether there was a proper evidentiary basis to set aside the Notice to Produce to the Court on the ground that it was too broad.']

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was dismissed because the respondent had conflated the Pt 21 Notice to Produce procedure with the distinct Pt 34 Notice to Produce to the Court procedure, and because there was no proper evidentiary basis showing that the documents sought to be produced to the Court were too broad.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed; costs reserved; matter stood over to 29 April 2016.

Orders

  • ['Motion dismissed.' 'Costs reserved.' 'Matter stood over to 29 April 2016.']