Brags Electrics Ltd v Gregory

In the Federal Court of Australia, Brags Electrics Ltd, a plaintiff, sought an order to discharge an Anton Piller order that had previously been made against Gregory, the defendant. The Anton Piller order had been issued to permit the plaintiff to search Gregory’s premises and seize certain documents believed to be evidence of copyright infringement. The plaintiff now sought to discharge the order on the basis that it had completed the inspection of the documents and that no further documents were required. Gregory opposed the application on the basis that there were still documents to be found and that the order had not been fully executed.

The court considered whether an Anton Piller order could be discharged after it had been executed and if so, what procedure should be followed and what evidence was required. The court noted that while an Anton Piller order was intended to be a one-off search, there may be circumstances in which it could be discharged early. The court held that in order to discharge an Anton Piller order after it had been executed, the applicant must show that the purpose of the order had been fulfilled and that there was no longer any need for the order to remain in place. The court also held that additional evidence may be required to support an application for discharge, beyond that which was necessary for the initial ex parte application.

The court found that the plaintiff had discharged the burden of showing that the purpose of the Anton Piller order had been fulfilled and that there was no longer any need for the order to remain in place. The court noted that the plaintiff had produced evidence of the documents that had been seized and inspected, and that there were no further documents required. The court also noted that the plaintiff had taken steps to ensure that any further documents that may be found would be dealt with appropriately. The court therefore discharged the Anton Piller order.

No further orders were made.