Lynx Engineering Consultants Pty Ltd v The Ani Corporation Limited trading as Ani Bradken Rail Transportation Group (No 4)

The Federal Court of Australia considered a motion by Lynx Engineering Consultants Pty Ltd seeking leave to administer interrogatories to WorleyParsons Services Pty Ltd. Lynx, the applicant, sought clarification on specific documents and communications related to the design of iron ore railway wagons. WorleyParsons, the fourth respondent, opposed the motion, arguing the interrogatories were fishing expeditions, sought discovery, and duplicated existing answers. The court needed to determine whether the interrogatories were appropriately confined and relevant to the case. In its ruling, Justice McKerracher noted that the interrogatories were narrowly focused on specific documents identified during the discovery process, and the questions were relevant to the core issues of the litigation. The court acknowledged some overlap with the discovery process but found that the interrogatories served to clarify existing documents rather than duplicate the discovery. Consequently, the court granted leave for the interrogatories to be administered, subject to certain modifications to ensure they did not exceed the scope of discovery or become fishing expeditions. The court also ordered WorleyParsons to pay Lynx's costs for the motion, with liberty to apply for further costs if necessary.