New cases on subpoena objections in the Federal jurisdiction have been added to the By Lawyers reference guide 101 Subpoena Answers.
In Kitchen v Director of Professional Services Review under s 83 of the Health Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) (No 3) [2020] FCA 634 the Federal Court affirmed McIlwain v Ramsey Food Packaging Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1233 and also Tamawood Ltd v Habitare Developments Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 364 to the effect that:
- a request for a subpoena cannot be used to disguise an application for discovery of documents, or as an alternative to an application for further and better discovery;
- documents for production must be identified with reasonable particularity;
- the material sought must have an adjectival relevance, that is, an apparent relevance to the issues in the principal proceedings; there must be a legitimate forensic purpose for the production of documents;
- a mere ‘fishing’ exercise can never justify the issue of subpoenas;
- a wide-ranging subpoena seeking documents of doubtful relevance at great inconvenience to, or that risk compromising the commercial privacy of, a third party, may not readily attract the grant of leave; and
- the issue of the subpoena must not, in all the circumstances, be oppressive in terms of its impact on the recipient.
101 Subpoena Answers is available in all By Lawyers litigation guides. It can assist practitioners with issuing and responding to subpoenas in all jurisdictions including the various grounds for subpoena objections.