Mansfield & Mansfield

In *Mansfield & Mansfield*, Judge Brown of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered objections to subpoenas filed by the parties. The core of the dispute concerned the relevance of documents sought by subpoena in property proceedings brought under the *Family Law Act 1975*.

The legal issues before the court were whether the documents sought by the subpoenas were relevant to the proceedings, and consequently, whether the objections to the subpoenas should be upheld. The court was required to determine the appropriate test for relevance in the context of subpoenaed material and the stage at which relevance is assessed.

Judge Brown applied the test of relevance as provided by section 55 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth), which requires that evidence, if accepted, could rationally affect the assessment of the probability of a fact in issue. The court noted that this test is broad and requires a rational or logical connection, however minimal or indirect, between the evidence and a fact in issue. In the context of subpoenas, the court must consider whether the material sought would be reasonably expected to throw some light on the issues in the proceeding. The court distinguished between the three steps involved in the use of subpoenas: obeying the subpoena, the court determining preliminary use of documents (which involves exercising a discretion to permit inspection), and finally, the court determining whether documents should be admitted into evidence. It is at the second step, concerning apparent relevance for inspection, that the difficulty often arises, as it is hard to determine relevance without inspection.

The court dismissed the objections to the subpoenas, reserving the costs of the application to the trial.