Galas v Alere Inc & Anor

Galas v Alere Inc & Anor

The order for production of documents did not comply with section 2(4)(b) of the 1975 Act as it was not for particular documents but amounted to discovery; therefore, paragraphs 1 to 3 of the order were set aside. The application to exclude topics J8 and J9 from oral examination was dismissed as the US court had not...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: David J. Galas; Defendant: Alere Inc.; Third Party/applicant: Dr Jerome McAleer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Application Under Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/vary Order
Outcome
Application partially allowed, partially dismissed.
Legal Topics
Evidence Abroad, Discovery Vs. Production of Documents, Relevance of Evidence, Oppression in Document Requests
Civil Procedure International Judicial Assistance Evidence Abroad Discovery Vs. Production of Documents Relevance of Evidence Oppression in Document Requests

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David J. Galas

Claimant/respondent

Alere Inc.

Defendant

Dr Jerome McAleer

Third Party/applicant

Procedural Posture

Application Under Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/vary Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order for production of documents complies with section 2(4)(b) of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975
  2. 2 Whether the document request is oppressive
  3. 3 Whether topics J8 and J9 for oral examination are relevant to the US proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The order for production of documents did not comply with section 2(4)(b) of the 1975 Act as it was not for particular documents but amounted to discovery; therefore, paragraphs 1 to 3 of the order were set aside. The application to exclude topics J8 and J9 from oral examination was dismissed as the US court had not plainly failed to consider relevance and it was not clear to the English court that the evidence was irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Application partially allowed, partially dismissed.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 1 to 3 of the order for production of documents set aside.
  • Application to exclude topics J8 and J9 from oral examination dismissed.