William Inglis and Son Limited v Australian Turf Club Limited [2021] NSWSC 1348

William Inglis and Son Limited v Australian Turf Club Limited [2021] NSWSC 1348

Discovery was ordered for categories where documents may assist in identifying facts relevant to the issues or calculation of damages pleaded by Inglis, but refused where documents were not sufficiently connected or relevant to the true value of the property at the relevant time.

Parties
Plaintiff: William Inglis and Son Limited; First Defendant: Australian Turf Club Limited; Second Defendant: SMEC Testing Services Pty Ltd; Third Defendant: Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Equity Commercial List / Interlocutory Procedural Motions Regarding Discovery
Outcome
Orders made partly in favour of plaintiff and defendants on respective discovery motions; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Discovery, Contract, Negligence, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct
Civil Procedure Discovery Contract Negligence Misleading or Deceptive Conduct

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Inglis and Son Limited

Plaintiff

Australian Turf Club Limited

First Defendant

SMEC Testing Services Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Equity Commercial List / Interlocutory Procedural Motions Regarding Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether additional categories of documents should be discovered by the plaintiff in response to defendants' notices of motion
  2. 2 Relevance of advice and valuation documents to the issues of contamination and calculation of damages
  3. 3 Appropriate calculation and evidence for damages in claims of breach of contract, negligence, and misleading or deceptive conduct

Ratio Decidendi

Discovery was ordered for categories where documents may assist in identifying facts relevant to the issues or calculation of damages pleaded by Inglis, but refused where documents were not sufficiently connected or relevant to the true value of the property at the relevant time.

Court Disposition

Orders made partly in favour of plaintiff and defendants on respective discovery motions; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • Orders in terms of paragraph 1 and 2 of the plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 8 September 2021;
  • In relation to the first defendant's notice of motion filed on 3 September 2021, an order that, in addition to the agreed categories, the plaintiff provide discovery of documents falling within category 13 by 3 December 2021;