Moran v Google LLC

Case [2024] FCA 181


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Moran v Google LLC [2024] FCA 181    

File number(s): NSD 1153 of 2023
Judgment of: HALLEY J
Date of judgment: 1 March 2024
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for preliminary discovery pursuant to r 7.22 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (Rules) – whether proceedings are of a kind stipulated by the Rules – whether requirements of r 10.42 and r 10.43 of the Rules have been met – whether the prospective applicant has a prima facie case – where Google LLC consents to the making of the orders – application granted – orders made
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 7.22, 10.42, 10.43
Cases cited:

Kabbabe v Google LLC [2020] FCA 126

Kandola v Google LLC [2021] FCA 1262

Lin v Google LLC [2021] FCA 1113

Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
Number of paragraphs: 20
Date of hearing: 1 March 2024
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr W Evatt
Solicitor for the Applicant: CMC Lawyers Pty Limited
Counsel for the Respondent: The respondent did not appear

ORDERS

NSD 1153 of 2023
BETWEEN:

BRENDAN JOSEPH MORAN

Applicant

AND:

GOOGLE LLC

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

HALLEY J

DATE OF ORDER:

1 MARCH 2024

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A.The application for preliminary discovery made by the prospective applicant was heard on Friday, 1 March 2024 at the Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales Registry.

B.On reading the prospective applicant’s evidence, and upon (a) hearing submissions from counsel for the prospective applicant, (b) being advised of efforts to bring this application for preliminary discovery to the notice of John Doe and Jane Doe, (c) being advised by counsel for the prospective applicant that Google LLC (Google) was served with the application for preliminary discovery, and (d) where Google did not appear to oppose the application for preliminary discovery and has not taken steps to attorn to the jurisdiction of the Court, the Court was prepared to make the following orders.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Google is to provide to the prospective applicant by email at Jacob.Zeitoun@CMCLawyers.com.au, within 20 days of being served with these orders:

(a)the subscriber’s registration information of the Google account associated with the Google Maps review: <

(First Google Account) as well as the IP addresses of the logins to the First Google Account, to the extent that such information or data is in the possession of and reasonably available to Google as at the date of these orders; and

(b)the subscriber’s registration information of the Google account associated with the Google Maps review attributed to “H P” and posted to the Google Maps Review page accessible at: < or around December 2022 as identified in Annexure JDZ2 to the affidavit of Jacob David Zeitoun sworn on 11 October 2023 (Second Google Account) (noting that the specific Google Maps review URL address is unavailable to the applicant as the review has since been deleted), as well as…

Continue reading Moran v Google LLC

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Moran v Google LLC [2024] FCA 181
Case
[2024] FCA 181
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Moran v Google LLC was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, where the plaintiff, Moran, sought an order for preliminary discovery against Google LLC, an American multinational conglomerate. The dispute centred around a Google Maps review that Moran alleged was defamatory. The plaintiff sought the registration information of the Google account associated with the review to facilitate identification of the reviewer, who was anonymous at the time.

The legal issues that arose required the court to determine whether the application for preliminary discovery was of a kind permitted by rule 7.22 of the Federal Court Rules 2011. Additionally, the court needed to ascertain if the requirements of rules 10.42 and 10.43 were satisfied. Specifically, rule 10.42 pertains to the circumstances under which the court may grant an order for discovery, while rule 10.43 outlines the process for applying for such an order. The court also needed to consider whether the prospective applicant had a prima facie case to warrant the discovery order.

In ruling on the application, the court acknowledged that the proceedings were indeed of the kind stipulated by the Rules. Google LLC consented to the making of the orders, thereby removing the necessity for the court to delve into the merits of the plaintiff’s case. The court found that all procedural requirements had been met and that the plaintiff had a prima facie case. Consequently, the application was granted, and the court issued an order directing Google to provide the requested information within a specified timeframe.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Google is to provide to the prospective applicant by email at Jacob.Zeitoun@CMCLawyers.com.au, within 20 days of being served with these orders:

(a) the subscriber’s registration information of the Google account associated with the Google Maps review: 1. Google is to provide to the prospec

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.