Austal Ships Pty Ltd v Incat Australia Pty Ltd (No 3)

Austal Ships Pty Ltd sought to administer a significant number of interrogatories to Incat Australia Pty Ltd in a legal dispute. The case was heard by the Federal Court, where the primary issue was whether the extensive interrogatories proposed by Austal were reasonable and necessary, or if they constituted an undue burden and a fishing exercise. The court had to determine whether the interrogatories were appropriate given the nature and scope of the dispute, and whether they aligned with the rules governing the administration of interrogatories under Order 16 of the Federal Court Rules.

The court found that the factual matrix of the case was not as complex as Austal had claimed, and the suggestion that the interests of justice would be served by ordering answers to such a large number of interrogatories was misplaced. The court noted that the respondents had already undergone pre-action discovery and cross-examination, and that the balance of the case was largely speculative. The extensive number of interrogatories proposed by Austal was deemed to be burdensome, and the court concluded that there was no indication from the materials submitted that such a broad scope was necessary.

In light of the respondents’ willingness to answer 82% of the interrogatories, the court decided to dismiss the application for interrogatories but on the condition that the respondents answer 932 out of 1,149 interrogatories within 21 days. The court also ordered that the interrogatories be sworn, filed, and served within 28 days and directed that unless submissions to the contrary were filed within 14 days, Austal would pay the respondents' costs of the motion. This decision underscored the importance of proportionality and reasonableness in the administration of interrogatories in legal proceedings.