Belverdere Pty Ltd v Idameneo (No 123) Pty Ltd
[2024] NSWSC 1043
•15 August 2024
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Belverdere Pty Ltd v Idameneo (No 123) Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1043 Hearing dates: 15 August 2024 Decision date: 15 August 2024 Jurisdiction: Equity - Commercial List Before: Stevenson J Decision: Defendant to give discovery to plaintiff in accordance with agreed and determined categories
Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – discovery – classes or categories of documents – where parties prepared a Redfern schedule setting out their competing contentions in relation to the disputed categories for discovery – where preliminary rulings in relation to those categories were circulated – where parties resolved remaining issues and reached established position in relation to discovery
Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Belverdere Pty Ltd (Plaintiff/Applicant)
Idameneo (No 123) Pty Ltd (Defendant/Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
C Bannan (Plaintiff/Applicant)
G O’Mahoney / A L Reid (Defendant/Respondent)
Keypoint Law Pty Ltd (Plaintiff/Applicant)
Johnson Winter Slattery (Defendant/Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/275051
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT (REVISED)
-
Dr Julie Lukic is a consultant obstetrician. The plaintiff, Belverdere Pty Ltd, is an incorporated medical practice associated with Dr Lukic. The defendant, Idameneo (No 123) Pty Ltd, is a provider of medical centre management services.
-
On 28 July 2014, the parties entered an agreement whereby Idameneo acquired the incorporated medical practice of Belverdere, as well as of another company associated with Dr Lukic, and agreed to provide medical centre premises and services to Belverdere, which, for its part, agreed to conduct its incorporated medical practice from those premises for 50 hours a week for seven years. There were terms of those agreements that Idameneo owns and retains the documents generated by the parties under these arrangements.
-
It was also a term of the agreement that Idameneo could terminate these agreements if it reasonably held the opinion that Dr Lukic had committed an act that would in its opinion adversely affect its business and reputation.
-
On 9 August 2018, Idameneo purported to terminate the agreement on this basis.
-
I am now dealing with a dispute as to discovery. Now is not the occasion to examine the detail of the matters raised by the defendant as having allegedly adversely affected its reputation, although some of the matters appear to relate to allegations of alleged rudeness or abrupt conduct on the part of Dr Lukic.
-
I have received careful submissions from both parties as to the various disputed categories.
-
I invited the parties to prepare a Redfern schedule setting out their competing contentions in relation to the categories and late last week circulated preliminary rulings in relation to those categories. This is a practice that some members of the Court seek to encourage the profession to engage in when dealing with the important but often taxing issues that arise when there are disputed categories of discovery, especially in commercial disputes such as this.
-
I thank the parties for engaging in the process, the result of which was that the time spent dealing with the remaining disputed categories was reduced from the initial estimate of half a day to some 30 minutes.
-
In the course of debate with counsel this morning, the remaining issues have been resolved and there is now an established position in relation to the disputed categories, which are set out in the Annexure attached to these reasons.
-
The parties agree that Idameneo ought to give discovery of the agreed and now determined categories in the Annexure to these reasons by 26 September 2024.
-
I note the matter is listed for directions on 23 August 2024. The parties have asked me to retain that directions date as there are orders in place requiring that the plaintiff give discovery by that date.
**********
Annexure A
Decision last updated: 20 August 2024
0
0
0