Temwell Pty Ltd v DKGR Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 1348
Documents in Category 2 relating to Mr McGregor and those referable to paragraphs or parts of Mr Hansen's affidavits of 12 April and 29 July 2003 containing expressions of expert opinion must be disclosed. Similarly, communications in Category 2 referable to paragraphs 21, 23, 27 or 29 of Mr Ivry's affidavit sworn 29 July 2003 must be disclosed. Privilege is otherwise maintained where the evidence is of fact and the foundation of expert opinions is set out in the affidavits or exhibits. The ruling draws clear distinctions between opinion and fact evidence per earlier authorities.
- Parties
- Applicant: Temwell Pty Ltd (ACN 082 656 157); First Respondent: DKGR Holdings Pty Ltd (formerly known as Dynamic Data Systems Pty Ltd) (In Liquidation) (ACN 062 778 616); Second Respondent / Cross Claimant: mCOM Solutions Inc.; Third Respondent: Dragon Ventures. Com Inc; Fourth Respondent / Cross Claimant: mCOM Solutions Australia Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (ACN 091 375 950); Fifth Respondent: David Hains; Sixth Respondent: Robert Van Zanten; Seventh Respondent: DragonVentures.com Ltd; Eighth Respondent: Richard Hains; Ninth Respondent: Ian Morris Kiefel; Cross Respondent: Slademere Pty Ltd (ACN 082 656 139); Cross Respondent: Shepridge Pty Ltd (ACN 082 696 077); Cross Respondent: Geoffrey Michael Tauber; Cross Respondent: Morry Fraid; Cross Respondent: Roger Enriquez
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 November 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Interlocutory Application—ruling on Production of Privileged Documents
- Outcome
- Orders for partial disclosure of privileged documents; specific directions made.
- Legal Topics
- Legal Professional Privilege, Discovery, Expert Evidence, Waiver of Privilege
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Temwell Pty Ltd (ACN 082 656 157)
Applicant
DKGR Holdings Pty Ltd (formerly known as Dynamic Data Systems Pty Ltd) (In Liquidation) (ACN 062 778 616)
First Respondent
mCOM Solutions Inc.
Second Respondent / Cross Claimant
Dragon Ventures. Com Inc
Third Respondent
mCOM Solutions Australia Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (ACN 091 375 950)
Fourth Respondent / Cross Claimant
David Hains
Fifth Respondent
Robert Van Zanten
Sixth Respondent
DragonVentures.com Ltd
Seventh Respondent
Richard Hains
Eighth Respondent
Ian Morris Kiefel
Ninth Respondent
Slademere Pty Ltd (ACN 082 656 139)
Cross Respondent
Shepridge Pty Ltd (ACN 082 696 077)
Cross Respondent
Geoffrey Michael Tauber
Cross Respondent
Morry Fraid
Cross Respondent
Roger Enriquez
Cross Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application—ruling on Production of Privileged Documents
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether privileged communications between the mCom respondents and certain witnesses (Hansen, Ivry, McGregor) should be produced to Temwell's solicitors under the rules on legal professional privilege and implied waiver.
Ratio Decidendi
Documents in Category 2 relating to Mr McGregor and those referable to paragraphs or parts of Mr Hansen's affidavits of 12 April and 29 July 2003 containing expressions of expert opinion must be disclosed. Similarly, communications in Category 2 referable to paragraphs 21, 23, 27 or 29 of Mr Ivry's affidavit sworn 29 July 2003 must be disclosed. Privilege is otherwise maintained where the evidence is of fact and the foundation of expert opinions is set out in the affidavits or exhibits. The ruling draws clear distinctions between opinion and fact evidence per earlier authorities.
Court Disposition
Orders for partial disclosure of privileged documents; specific directions made.
Orders
- All documents in Category 2 relating to Mr McGregor to be disclosed to Applicant's solicitors.
- All documents in Category 2 referable to paragraphs or relevant parts of Mr Hansen's affidavits sworn 12 April and 29 July 2003 containing expert opinion to be disclosed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment