Esselbrugge and Esselbrugge

In *Esselbrugge and Esselbrugge*, heard by Tree J, the wife sought to amend subpoenas issued to ANZ Bank and Commonwealth Bank, which the husband had objected to. The dispute concerned the scope of documents to be produced by the banks in relation to J Pty Ltd.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the subpoenas, as originally issued, were overly broad and ought to be set aside, or if they could be amended to a more appropriate scope. This involved considering the principles governing the issuance and scope of subpoenas in family law proceedings, particularly in relation to third-party financial institutions.

Tree J reasoned that while the original subpoenas were too broad in their request for documents pertaining to J Pty Ltd without a specified timeframe, they could be appropriately narrowed. The court granted the wife leave to amend the subpoenas to limit the production of documents to those pertaining to J Pty Ltd after 1 January 2008. This amendment addressed the husband's objections by refining the scope of the requested information.

Consequently, the court ordered that the wife have leave to amend the subpoenas as specified, and that otherwise, the husband's Notices of Objection to the subpoenas be dismissed.