Green Pastures (Donegal) -v- Aurivo Co-Operative Society Ltd & anor [2014] IEHC 209 (04 April 2014)
The documents sought by the plaintiff under Category 4, specifically those required to be kept under Annex 1 and 2 of the Milk Quota Regulations, are not within the scope of the discovery order, which is limited to documents evidencing the methods or systems used by the first defendant in determining allocation of excess milk quota. The first defendant has complied with the discovery order as properly interpreted. There is no evidence of wilful default or deliberate evasion, and the plaintiff's application is based on a misconstruction of the discovery category.
- Citation
- [2014] IEHC 209
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Green Pastures (Donegal); First Defendant: Aurivo Co-Operative Society Limited; Second Defendant: David Ramsey
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 04 April 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out of Defence or Further and Better Discovery
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Discovery, Striking Out Defence, Milk Quota Regulations, Relevance of Documents, Compliance With Court Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Green Pastures (Donegal)
Plaintiff
Aurivo Co-Operative Society Limited
First Defendant
David Ramsey
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out of Defence or Further and Better Discovery
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the first defendant complied with the court's discovery order regarding Category 4 documents
- 2 Whether the first defendant's alleged non-compliance was deliberate and warrants striking out the defence
- 3 Whether the documents sought by the plaintiff fall within the scope of the discovery order
Ratio Decidendi
The documents sought by the plaintiff under Category 4, specifically those required to be kept under Annex 1 and 2 of the Milk Quota Regulations, are not within the scope of the discovery order, which is limited to documents evidencing the methods or systems used by the first defendant in determining allocation of excess milk quota. The first defendant has complied with the discovery order as properly interpreted. There is no evidence of wilful default or deliberate evasion, and the plaintiff's application is based on a misconstruction of the discovery category.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- Plaintiff's motion to strike out the defence or for further and better discovery is refused.
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