Edward Clark Allon v RMIT University

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION

PERSONAL INJURIES LIST

S CI 2015 02715  

Edward Clark Allon	Plaintiff
v
RMIT University	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	JUDICIAL REGISTRAR CLAYTON
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	7 April 2017
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	19 April 2017
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Edward Clark Allon v RMIT University
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2017] VSC 203

---

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for further discovery – Objection to production of redacted parts of discovered document – Objection on basis of relevance to pleading - Whether particulars of negligence in pleading sufficient to warrant discovery – Whether redaction justified – Production ordered with redaction of identifying details - Application granted in part - Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic), ss 7, 55.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr A Ingram of Counsel	Shine Lawyers
For the Defendant	Mr B House, Solicitor	Minter Ellison

JUDICIAL REGISTRAR:

The plaintiff’s application for further discovery is granted in part. 

The defendant will be ordered to make discovery of:

a.the spreadsheet identified as “WorkCover Claims as at 310909.xls” redacted only as to the names and identifying details of employees other than Mr Hana, Mr May and Mr Pygall; and

b.any incident reports and any WorkCover claim forms relating to any RMIT employees’ stress, anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies or any other psychological disposition between 1 August 2008 and 31 August 2009 with names and identifying details redacted.

Introduction

1. This is an application by the plaintiff, Mr Allon, for further discovery pursuant to Order 29 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic), (“the Rules”). In support of his application, Mr Allon relies on affidavits of his solicitor, Mr Peter Haddad, sworn 1 September 2016 and 2 March 2017.

1. By summons filed 7 September 2016, Mr Allon sought orders relating to a number of other matters that were subsequently resolved by consent.  This application relates to paragraph 2 of Mr Allon’s summons, being an application under r 29 for further discovery of certain documents or categories of documents. In particular, Mr Allon seeks discovery in respect of the following:

(a)   Mr Nihal Hana’s employment contract and/or position description for the position of Senior Educator Lev 2.2 + LDG and for any other position within the College of SET;

(b)   Any WorkCover claims data and/or documents relating to RMIT employees’ complaints of stress, including but not limited to:

(i)      An unredacted version of the spreadsheet previously discovered by the defendant as a redacted document, named “WorkCover Claims as at 310909.xls”;

(ii)    Any injury log book/s covering the period 1 July 2008 to 31 December 2009;

(iii)   Any incident reports and/or claim forms relating to any RMIT employees’ stress, anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies and/or any other psychological disposition; and

(iv)   Any records (including email, minutes of meeting, hand written note or otherwise) of reports to HR and/or People and Culture relating to employees’ stress, anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies and/or other psychological disposition.

1. The defendant, RMIT, opposes the application…