FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SELDON & SELDON | [2020] FamCA 762 |
| FAMILY LAW – ARBITRATION – proceeding in National Arbitration List – philosophy of the list to provide speedy, cost efficient determinations of applications in the list. FAMILY LAW – SUBPOENA – challenge to the width of documents sought – challenge based also on whether a “fishing expedition” was being engaged in – held, documents sought were relevant and none of the grounds of objection were made out. |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79, 117(1) Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) ch 13 |
| Harold H. Glass, Seminars on Evidence (Law Book Co of Australasia, 1970) |
| APPLICANT: | Mr Seldon |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Seldon |
| FILE NUMBER: | PAC | 230 | of | 2018 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 14 September 2020 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Melbourne |
| PLACE HEARD: | Melbourne |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Wilson J |
| HEARING DATE: | 9 September 2020 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Ms R. Druitt |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | Frank Law |
| COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Mr J. D. Shaw |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Langenberg Law |
Orders
I dismiss the notice of objection dated 24 August 2020 to the subpoena addressed to D Pty Ltd.
Costs of this subpoena challenge must be absorbed by the parties under s 117(1) of the Family Law Act.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Seldon & Seldon has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975
Continue reading SELDON & SELDON
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- SELDON & SELDON [2020] FamCA 762
- Case
- [2020] FamCA 762
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the subpoena, as issued, was overly wide and sought documents that were not relevant to the proceedings. The court was required to determine if the objections raised against the subpoena were valid, particularly in the context of the National Arbitration List's objective to facilitate speedy and cost-efficient dispute resolution.
Wilson J dismissed the notice of objection to the subpoena, finding that the documents sought were relevant to the proceedings. The court determined that none of the grounds of objection raised by the objecting party were made out, implicitly finding that the subpoena did not amount to an impermissible fishing expedition. The court ordered that the costs associated with this subpoena challenge be absorbed by the parties, pursuant to section 117(1) of the *Family Law Act*.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
I dismiss the notice of objection dated 24 August 2020 to the subpoena addressed to D Pty Ltd.
2.
Costs of this subpoena challenge must be absorbed by the parties under s 117(1) of the Family Law Act.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
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.