Dank v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited [2014] NSWSC 1728

The subpoena is not fishing or oppressive because the documents sought are directly relevant to substantive issues and support the defendants' truth defence; Dr Khan is compelled to produce them.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 07 November 2014
Procedural Posture: Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside Subpoena
Outcome: application refused
Legal Topics: ['subpoena' 'oppression' 'fishing' 'truth Defence' 'justification' 'defamation']

['procedure'] ['subpoena' 'oppression' 'fishing' 'truth Defence' 'justification' 'defamation']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside Subpoena

Legal Issues

1 ['whether the subpoena amounts to fishing' 'whether the subpoena is oppressive' 'whether particulars of proof may be relied upon in support of the imputations' 'whether the subpoena is necessary for a truth defence' 'whether the documents sought go directly to the substantive issues in the proceedings']

Ratio Decidendi

The subpoena is not fishing or oppressive because the documents sought are directly relevant to substantive issues and support the defendants' truth defence; Dr Khan is compelled to produce them.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

["Dr Ijaz Khan's application to set aside the subpoena issued to him is refused" "Dr Khan is to pay the defendants' costs of the application"]