Orman v Gobbo (No 2)

The respondents, Orman and others, sought further discovery from the appellant, Gobbo, who was a former barrister. The respondents aimed to include an additional claim of misfeasance in public office in their amended pleading. The central dispute involved the respondents' claims that their reputations were damaged due to the appellant's alleged misconduct in her role as a barrister representing them in criminal proceedings. The legal issues before the court were whether the documents sought in further discovery were relevant to the core issues of the proceeding and whether the appellant held a public office as a barrister representing the respondents in criminal proceedings, which would permit the addition of a claim for misfeasance in public office.

The court found that the documents sought in further discovery were relevant to the respondents' claims of reputational damage. The court further determined that the appellant did not hold a public office as a barrister representing the respondents in criminal proceedings. The court concluded that there was no real prospect of establishing that the appellant's impugned conduct was done as a public officer and that there was no public power exercisable by the appellant as an incident of her role as counsel. The court held that the respondents' claim for misfeasance in public office could not be added to their pleadings.

The court ordered further discovery of the documents sought by the respondents. The court refused leave to add the claim of misfeasance in public office to the respondents' pleadings. However, the court granted leave for the respondents to make other amendments to their pleadings.