Re Bauhaus Pyrmont Pty Ltd (in liq)

Bauhaus Pyrmont Pty Ltd, in liquidation, sought an order from the Court that it should not be required to pay the costs of complying with a subpoena until after the liquidator had disclosed relevant documents. The respondent to the application, Ms. Williams, argued that advance payment was required by the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court had to determine whether the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules mandated the applicant to pay expenses incurred in complying with a subpoena before disclosure of relevant documents. The applicant argued that the Rules did not require advance payment, and that the Court had a discretion to order a different approach. The respondent argued that the Rules did provide for advance payment of costs and that the Court did not have a discretion to order otherwise.

The Court found that the Rules did not require advance payment of costs. Rather, the Rules provided that the Court may order that a person who has been served with a subpoena to produce documents need not pay the costs of complying with the subpoena until after the person has disclosed relevant documents. The Court held that it did have a discretion to order that no advance payment was required. It found that the respondent had not shown that the applicant was likely to be unable to pay the costs of complying with the subpoena. Therefore, the Court exercised its discretion to order that the applicant was not required to pay the costs of compliance until after disclosure of the documents.

The Court made an order that Bauhaus Pyrmont Pty Ltd was not required to pay the costs of complying with the subpoena until after disclosure of the documents.