DANDACHI & NAHYAN

The parties to this proceeding were Dandachi and Nahyan. The dispute concerned an application by Dandachi to set aside a subpoena issued to Nahyan, who was not a party to the original proceedings. The application was heard by Collier J in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the subpoena issued to Nahyan was oppressive and should therefore be set aside. This required the Court to consider the principles governing the issuance and setting aside of subpoenas, particularly in circumstances where the subpoenaed party is not directly involved in the substantive dispute between the original litigants.

Collier J applied the principles established in cases such as *O'Brien v. Australian Broadcasting Corporation* and *South East Water Ltd v. Environmental Protection Authority*. Her Honour considered whether the subpoena sought information that was relevant and necessary for the proper conduct of the litigation, and whether the burden imposed on Nahyan by complying with the subpoena was disproportionate to the benefit gained by the parties. The Court noted that a subpoena should not be used as a fishing expedition. After considering the evidence and submissions, Collier J found that the subpoena was not oppressive and therefore dismissed the application to set it aside.