A new subpoena case has been added to the By Lawyers reference manual 101 Subpoena Answers.
In Instyle Estate Agents Guhgahlin Pty Ltd v Hambrook [2020] ACTSC (26 October 2020) the court set aside a number of subpoenas in a civil matter, following Federal, NSW and previous ACT authorities.
The decision is particularly useful because it canvasses the plaintiffs’ four separate grounds for objection to the subpoenas, namely:
- that they lacked a legitimate forensic purpose;
- that they in effect sought discovery from non-parties, or alternatively, the terms of the subpoenas were impermissibly wide so as to constitute ‘fishing’;
- that the terms of the schedules to each subpoena were so wide as to be oppressive; and
- that the issuing party failed to pay both conduct money and money for the reasonable expenses of production.
McWilliam AsJ discussed and determined the court’s power and the applicable legal principles in respect of each of those grounds of objection.
This new subpoena case augments the many cases from all Australian jurisdictions to which links are provided in this helpful publication publication. It will particularly assist ACT practitioners in understanding and applying the law on subpoena objections.
101 Subpoena Answers is available in the Reference Materials folder on the matter plan in every By Lawyers litigation publication.