Tiger Brands Limited and Others v Pillay and Others (Famous Brands and Another Intervening) (2019/25309; 2018/12835; 2019/36431) [2020] ZAGPJHC 160 (23 June 2020)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Set Aside Subpoenas and Determine Scope of Document Production in Class Action Proceedings

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether Tiger Brands is entitled to obtain production of documents from non-parties by way of subpoena in the context of a class action.
2. 2 Whether the subpoenas issued are overly broad, vague, or constitute an abuse of process.
3. 3 Whether confidentiality or commercial sensitivity is a valid ground to resist production of documents relevant to the litigation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Tiger Brands is entitled to obtain production of documents from non-parties by way of subpoena, as the documents sought are relevant to the issues raised in the pleadings and necessary for the preparation and conduct of the trial. The right to obtain evidence by subpoena is a component of the right to a fair hearing under section 34 of the Constitution. The subpoenas, although voluminous and wide-ranging, were sufficiently specified and relevant to the action. Confidentiality or commercial sensitivity does not constitute a valid ground to refuse production of relevant documents, although appropriate controls may be placed on access to their contents. The period for...

Court Disposition

Applications to set aside subpoenas and prevent production of documents are dismissed. Each party, including intervening parties, to pay their own costs.

Orders

• Tiger Brands is entitled to obtain production of documents by way of subpoenas from non-parties.
• Production of documents may be made in electronic form.