Air Pacific Ltd v Transport Workers Union of Australia

Air Pacific Ltd filed a motion to set aside subpoenas issued by the Transport Workers Union of Australia (TWU), its officials, and one of its members, Mr Smith. The subpoenas sought the production of documents, records, and information relevant to a dispute over industrial action by the TWU against Air Pacific. The Federal Court was tasked with deciding whether the subpoenas were properly issued and whether they could be set aside on the grounds of privilege, ambiguity, or being overly broad.

The court considered whether the subpoenas addressed to the proper office of Air Pacific were privileged, and whether privilege could be claimed before documents were produced to the court or only related to access. The court also examined whether the limitation of access to legal advisers, who gave an undertaking not to use the documents for criminal proceedings, prevented the possibility of self-incrimination arising. Furthermore, the court assessed whether the subpoenas needed to expressly confine the documents required to be produced to those in the possession, custody, or control of the addressees, and whether the addressees had an obligation to seek out documents not in their possession, custody, or control. The court also considered whether the subpoenas were ambiguous or too wide.

The Court held that the subpoenas were properly issued and dismissed the motions to set them aside. The Court found that privilege did not apply to the subpoenas addressed to the proper office of Air Pacific, and that the limitation of access to legal advisers prevented the possibility of self-incrimination. The Court also held that the subpoenas did not need to expressly confine the documents required to be produced to those in the possession, custody, or control of the addressees, and that there was no obligation on the addressees to seek out documents not in their possession, custody, or control. The Court found that the subpoenas were not ambiguous or too wide. The Court ordered that the subpoenas be complied with as if certain words were deleted and directed that the subpoenas addressed to the first and second respondents be complied with as if other words were deleted from them. The costs of the motions were reserved.