Quanta Software International Pty Ltd v Computer Management Services Pty Ltd

In the case of Quanta Software International Pty Ltd v Computer Management Services Pty Ltd, the applicant sought an order for the respondent to make discovery of certain documents and source codes related to the distribution and use of the EUNICE software. The applicant alleged that the respondent had infringed the applicant's copyright by distributing the EUNICE software without permission. The court was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of FCR, O 15A r 6 to obtain the discovery order and whether any discretionary considerations should be taken into account. The court found that the applicant had made reasonable inquiries and had insufficient information relating to the quantum of its claim to make a decision whether to commence proceedings. The court also found that the applicant had allowed sufficient time for the respondent to respond to the request and that the application was not framed too broadly. The court made an order for the respondent to make discovery of certain documents and source codes within a specified timeframe and subject to certain conditions, including that the documents be inspected only by certain persons and that the contents be kept confidential. The court also ordered that the respondent pay fifty per cent of the applicant's costs of the application.
The court's decision provides guidance on the use of FCR, O 15A r 6 to obtain discovery of documents and source codes in cases of alleged copyright infringement. The court found that the applicant had satisfied the requirements of the rule and that the discovery order should be limited to the narrower categories specified in the alternative orders. The court also found that the respondent had not provided evidence to support a form of order which would provide that any documents produced by the respondent should be inspected only by an independent expert. The court's decision also highlights the importance of allowing sufficient time for the respondent to respond to a request for discovery and the need to consider discretionary considerations when making a discovery order.