Mayfield Development Corporation Pty Ltd v NSW Ports Operations Hold Co Pty Ltd

Mayfield Development Corporation Pty Ltd applied for leave to appeal an interlocutory judgment that dismissed its application for non-party discovery in the context of a broader proceeding that has been stayed. The Federal Court was asked to decide whether the primary judge misconstrued section 83(1) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and whether the judge erred in her discretion to refuse non-party discovery. The applicant also contended that it would face substantial injustice if leave to appeal were refused.

The court examined the statutory language and the judge's interpretation, concluding that the primary judge did not misconstrue the provision. The court found that the judge exercised her discretion appropriately and did not err in refusing non-party discovery. Given the absence of a misconstruction or error in the exercise of discretion, the court found that the applicant would not face substantial injustice if the appeal were not permitted. The court further noted that the applicant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances that would warrant leave to appeal. The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the respondents and other parties involved in the application. Additionally, the court granted leave to the respondents to file written submissions on the basis for assessing the awarded costs and allowed the applicant to respond to those submissions.