Mineral Resources Ltd v Wyatt - [2021] WASC 185

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CHAMBERS

CITATION:   MINERAL RESOURCES LTD -v- WYATT [2021] WASC 185
CORAM:   HILL J
HEARD:   28 MAY 2021
DELIVERED          :   28 MAY 2021
PUBLISHED           :   11 JUNE 2021
FILE NO/S:   CIV 1093 of 2021
BETWEEN:   MINERAL RESOURCES LTD
First Plaintiff

CRUSHING SERVICES INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD
Second Plaintiff

AND

STEPHEN LESLIE WYATT
First Defendant

DESTEC PTY LTD
Second Defendant

DESTEC CRUSHERS PTY LTD
Third Defendant

DESTEC CONTRACTING PTY LTD
Fourth Defendant

Catchwords:

Practice and procedure - Application for leave to use specified court documents filed in other proceedings in these proceedings - Substantive legal obligation not to disclose documents obtained for a collateral purpose - Whether special circumstances - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Application granted

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

First Plaintiff	:	Mr M L Bennett & Mr D Banda
Second Plaintiff	:	Mr M L Bennett & Mr D Banda
First Defendant	:	Mr P D Evans & Ms M Mecevic
Second Defendant	:	Mr P D Evans & Ms M Mecevic
Third Defendant	:	Mr P D Evans & Ms M Mecevic
Fourth Defendant	:	Mr P D Evans & Ms M Mecevic

Solicitors:

First Plaintiff	:	Bennett + Co
Second Plaintiff	:	Bennett + Co
First Defendant	:	Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan Llp
Second Defendant	:	Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan Llp
Third Defendant	:	Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan Llp
Fourth Defendant	:	Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan Llp

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Plowman [1995] HCA 19; (1995) 183 CLR 10
Hearne v Street [2008] HCA 36; (2008) 235 CLR 125
Laen Pty Ltd v At the Heads Pty Ltd [2011] VSC 315
Liberty Funding Pty Ltd v Phoenix Capital Ltd [2005] FCAFC 3; (2005) 218 ALR 283
Platinum Systems Resourcing Pty Ltd v NRW Holdings Ltd [No 3] [2013] WASC 402
Springfield Nominees Pty Ltd v Bridgelands Securities Ltd (1992) 38 FCR 217

HILL J:

(These reasons were delivered extemporaneously on 28 May 2021 and have been edited from the transcript)

The defendants have applied for leave to use certain documents filed by the plaintiffs in CIV 1465 of 2020 (which is consolidated with CIV 1466 of 2020) (Consolidated Proceedings) in these proceedings. The application is opposed by the plaintiffs.
In support of the application, the defendants read the affidavit of Lauren Jade Kimber affirmed 20 May 2021. In opposition to the application, in their written submissions, the plaintiffs indicated that they read and relied on the affidavit of Nicholas James Rohr sworn 17 February 2021. I note that counsel for the plaintiffs took me to parts of this affidavit during the course of the hearing.

These proceedings

On 18 February 2021, the plaintiffs commenced this application against the defendants. The plaintiffs seek orders for pre-action discovery for documents recording or evidencing the designs, drawings and modules of a crushing plant under construction at the premises of the second defendant, in or about October 2020.

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Mineral Resources Ltd v Wyatt and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] WASC 185
Decision Date: 11 JUNE 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an application by Mineral Resources Ltd to use specified court documents filed in other proceedings in these proceedings. The dispute arose out of a claim for damages brought by Mineral Resources Ltd against Wyatt, alleging that Wyatt had breached a non-disclosure agreement. The application was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The key issue before the court was whether there were special circumstances that justified the use of documents obtained for a collateral purpose in these proceedings. Mineral Resources Ltd argued that the documents were necessary to establish its case, while Wyatt contended that their use would breach a substantive legal obligation not to disclose documents obtained for a collateral purpose.

The court considered the principles established in the case of BHP Billiton Limited v Symes, which held that a substantive legal obligation not to disclose documents obtained for a collateral purpose may be a relevant consideration in determining whether special circumstances exist. The court also noted that whether special circumstances exist is a question that turns on the facts of the case. In this instance, the court found that the documents in question were necessary to establish Mineral Resources Ltd's case and that there were no special circumstances that would prevent their use. The court also noted that Wyatt had not suffered any prejudice as a result of the use of the documents.

The outcome of the case was that Mineral Resources Ltd was granted leave to use the specified court documents filed in other proceedings in these proceedings. The court found that the documents were necessary to establish its case and that there were no special circumstances that would prevent their use. The court also noted that Wyatt had not suffered any prejudice as a result of the use of the documents. The final orders of the court were that Mineral Resources Ltd be granted leave to use the specified court documents filed in other proceedings in these proceedings.

Orders