daytraderHQ Ltd v Hometrader Ltd

daytraderHQ Ltd sought an order under r 4 of O 26A of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2006 (WA) for the first defendant, Hometrader Ltd, and other defendants to give discovery of documents that may assist daytraderHQ Ltd in deciding whether or not to commence proceedings against them. daytraderHQ Ltd claimed that the first defendant's training protocols were substantially similar to those used by daytraderHQ Ltd and may have been based upon, if not plagiarised from, the plaintiff's documents. The defendants argued that the plaintiff had not established that it may have a cause of action against them as is required by r 4(1). They also submitted that the plaintiff had already obtained sufficient information to enable it to make a decision as to whether or not to commence proceedings and in fact the evidence showed that a decision to commence proceedings had been taken. The court held that the plaintiff had established that it may have a cause of action against the defendants. However, the court was not satisfied that an order for discovery should be made as it was not in the interests of justice to do so. The court concluded that the strength of the plaintiff's case, coupled with the commercial sensitivity of the documents in question, meant that this was not a proper case in which to make orders sought by the plaintiff.