FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
ObjectiVision Pty Ltd v Visionsearch Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] FCA 1146
Citation: ObjectiVision Pty Ltd v Visionsearch Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] FCA 1146 Parties: OBJECTIVISION PTY LIMITED ACN 090 253 697 v VISIONSEARCH PTY LIMITED ACN 150 067 271 and UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY ABN 15 211 513 464 File number: NSD 2433 of 2013 Judge: PERRY J Date of judgment: 28 October 2014 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for preliminary discovery – No substantive question of law raised Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r 7.23 Cases cited: ObjectiVision Pty Ltd v Visionsearch Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1087 Date of hearing: 27 October 2014 Place: Sydney Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 6 Counsel for the Prospective Applicant: Mr R Lancaster SC Counsel for the Prospective First Respondent: Mr C Stomo Counsel for the Prospective Second Respondent: Mr P Flynn
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 2433 of 2013
BETWEEN: OBJECTIVISION PTY LIMITED ACN 090 253 697
Prospective ApplicantAND: VISIONSEARCH PTY LIMITED ACN 150 067 271
Prospective First RespondentUNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY ABN 15 211 513 464
Prospective Second Respondent
JUDGE:
PERRY J
DATE OF ORDER:
27 OCTOBER 2014
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.
On or before 24 November 2014, each of the Prospective Respondents give discovery of the documents set out in the Schedule to this order, save for the documents in categories 11, 12, 13, 15 and 16, in conformity with the requirements of rules 7.25 and 20.17 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
2.Subject to order 5, on or before 1 December 2014 the Prospective Respondents make available for inspection the documents identified in Categories 1 and 8 in the Schedule by each of them:
(a) imaging and storing a complete copy of all documents falling within Categories 1 and 8 on an electronic storage device, including imaging and storing a complete copy of any source code repository, as referred to in those categories;
(b) providing the electronic storage device to the Prospective Applicant's solicitors, together with any passwords protecting the data stored on the device.
3.Subject to order 5, on or before 1 December 2014 the Prospective Respondents produce to the solicitors for the Prospective Applicant for inspection the documents identified in Categories 2 and 9 in the Schedule by each of them providing a complete copy of such documents on an electronic storage device to the Prospective Applicant's solicitors, together with any passwords protecting the data stored on the drive.
4.Subject to order 5, on or before 1 December 2014 the Prospective Respondents produce to the solicitors for the Prospective Applicant for inspection all documents falling within Categories 3 to 7 inclusive, 10 and 14 in the Schedule.
5.
Access to:
(a)
Documents discovered in Categories 1, 2, 8 and 9 in the Schedule, together with any electronic storage devices upon which copies of such Documents are stored pursuant to Orders 2 and…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read ObjectiVision Pty Ltd v Visionsearch Pty Ltd (No 2) 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2014] FCA 1146
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the nature of the dispute, which involved claims of intellectual property infringement and misuse of confidential information. Given the nature of the claims, the court found that there were substantial merits to the application for discovery. However, the court noted that no substantive question of law was raised by the application. The court then proceeded to make detailed orders for the discovery of specific categories of documents, stipulating deadlines and the manner in which the documents should be produced. The orders also included provisions for limiting access to certain documents to maintain confidentiality.
The court issued comprehensive orders directing Visionsearch to provide various categories of documents to ObjectiVision by specified dates. Additionally, the court ordered that certain documents be imaged and stored on electronic devices, which would then be provided to ObjectiVision's solicitors. The court also limited access to certain documents to the parties' legal representatives and independent experts, who were required to sign confidentiality undertakings. The court vacated previous orders and granted the parties the liberty to apply for further orders. The case management was further streamlined by requiring the parties to agree on a timetable for the filing of written submissions on costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. On or before 24 November 2014, each of the Prospective Respondents give discovery of the documents set out in the Schedule to this order, save for the documents in categories 11, 12, 13, 15 and 16, in conformity with the requirements of rules 7.25 and 20.17 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
2. Subject to order 5, on or before 1 December 2014 the Prospective Respondents make available for inspection the documents identified in Categories 1 and 8 in the Schedule by each of them:
(a) imaging and storing a complete copy of all documents falling within Categories 1 and 8 on an electronic storage device, including imaging and storing a complete copy of any source code repository, as referred to in those categories;
(b) providing the electronic storage device to the Prospective Applicant's solicitors, together with any passwords protecting the data stored on the device.
3. Subject to order 5, on or before 1 December 2014 the Prospective Respondents produce to the solicitors for the Prospective Applicant for inspection the documents identified in Categories 2 and 9 in the Schedule by each of them providing a complete copy of such documents on an electronic storage device to the Prospective Applicant's solicitors, together with any passwords protecting the data stored on the drive.
4. Subject to order 5, on or before 1 December 2014 the Prospective Respondents produce to the solicitors for the Prospective Applicant for inspection all documents falling within Categories 3 to 7 inclusive, 10 and 14 in the Schedule.
5. Access to:
(a) Documents discovered in Categories 1, 2, 8 and 9 in the Schedule, together with any electronic storage devices upon which copies of such Documents are stored pursuant to Orders 2 and 3; and
(b) Documents discovered in any other Categories in the Schedule in respect of which a claim for confidentiality is made,
be limited, until further order, to the solicitors and Counsel acting for the Prospective Applicant and any independent experts retained by the Prospective Applicant, each of whom must have signed first and provided to the relevant Prospective Respondent, and in respect of the expert to the Court, a confidentiality undertaking in a form to be agreed by the parties.
6. The orders made on 13 October 2014 are vacated nunc pro tunc.
7. The parties have liberty to apply on three days’ notice.
THE COURT NOTES THAT:
1. The parties will agree draft orders setting a timetable as to the filing of written submissions on costs, to be provided to the Judge’s Associate and to be made by her Honour in chambers if possible.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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.