Siabon Seet v NA NA

[2025] NSWSC 759

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Siabon Seet v NA NA [2025] NSWSC 759

Hearing dates:

07 July 2025

Date of orders:

07 July 2025

Decision date:

07 July 2025

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Before:

Hamill J (as Duty Judge)

Decision:

Summons granted.

Catchwords:

CIVIL LAW – orders to facilitate the taking of evidence of commission – request from overseas court – statutory criteria satisfied – delightfully succinct submissions – no question of principle

Legislation Cited:

Evidence on Commission Act1995 (NSW), ss 32(1), 33

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 24.1-24.3, 24.7-24.16, 24.20, 52, 52.1(1)(a), 52.1-52.6

Cases Cited:

N/A

Texts Cited:

N/A

Category:

Procedural rulings

Parties:

Siabon Seet (ex parte)

Representation:

Counsel:
G Keesing

Solicitors:
Gilbert + Tobin

File Number(s):

2025/00226363

Publication restriction:

N/A

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1. By summons filed on 13 June 2025, the plaintiff seeks a raft of orders pursuant to the Evidence on Commission Act1995 (NSW) (“the Act”) and in compliance with r 52 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).

2. The plaintiff is a partner of an Australian law firm Gilbert + Tobin, and has been nominated to undertake that role by a court in the United States, namely the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (“Nevada District Court”).

3. The summons is supported by the plaintiff’s affidavit which in turn annexes or incorporates a number of relevant documents, including information relating to the United States proceedings; the relevant witnesses who reside in New South Wales, and there are three of them; and critically for present purposes a request from the Nevada District Court which falls within the ambit of s 32(1) of the Act.

4. The orders sought in the summons that was originally filed have been amended, and an amended summons was included in an application book, as we decided to call it, which was marked Exhibit A.

5. I have also received helpful and delightfully succinct submissions from Ms Keesing of counsel.

6. I am satisfied that the statutory prerequisites of s 32 are satisfied:

1. that the application is made in pursuance of a request issued by or on behalf of a court or tribunal exercising jurisdiction in a place outside the State, and

2. that the evidence to which the application relates is to be obtained for the purposes of proceedings which either have been instituted before the requesting court or whose institution before that court is contemplated.

7. I am also satisfied that the orders set out in the summons as amended for the kinds the orders contemplated by s 33, that is, that they facilitate or make provision for the attendance of the relevant witnesses and their compulsion to attend, if necessary, and for the examination as requested by the overseas court.

8. In view of what I will call simply and, as politely as I can, the imperatives operating in the duty court today, and in view of the comprehensive material filed in support of the summons, all of which will be on the file, I see no utility in providing further reasons for making the orders sought in the summons.

9. Accordingly, I will make the orders in the summons:

1. Leave be granted, pursuant to sections 33 of the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW) (the Act) and r 52.1(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (the Rules), to issue a subpoena to each of Emma Charles (Charles), Lloyd Sefton (Sefton), and William Soo (Soo) (together, the Witnesses) to give evidence, and in the case of Charles and Sefton produce documents, in the form annexed to these orders and marked Annexure A (the Subpoenas).

2. Direct that a sealed copy of these orders be served on each of the Witnesses concurrently with service of the relevant Subpoena by no later than 5pm, 14 July 2025.

3. Naomi Sharp SC of the New South Wales Bar, or another suitable person, be appointed as examiner pursuant to s 33 of the Act and/or r 24.3 of the Rules (the Examiner).

4. The examination be conducted in accordance with r 52.1 to 52.6, 24.1 to 24.3, 24.7 to 24.16 and 24.20 of the Rules, subject to any variations to the operation of those procedures set out in these orders (the Examination).

5. The Examiner conduct the Examination at the offices of Gilbert + Tobin, Level 35, Tower 2/200 Barangaroo Avenue, Sydney, New South Wales, at a convenient time, but no later than 29 August 2025.

6. At the Examination, oral examination (including cross-examination and re-examination, either in person or by videoconference) of the Witnesses be permitted to be conducted by the US attorneys for the parties in Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. and Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Light & Wonder, Inc., LNW Gaming, Inc. and SciPlay Corporation, 2:24-cv-00382-GMN-MDC, before the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (the US Proceeding) on the deposition topics annexed to each of the Subpoenas annexed to these orders.

7. Each of the Witnesses be sworn or affirmed before evidence is taken.

8. The Examiner cause:

1. the evidence of each of the Witnesses to be transcribed in writing (the Transcript) and videorecorded (the Video-Recording), as per r 24.12 and 24.13 of the Rules; and

2. such documents or other articles produced and identified during the Examination to be marked and attested as exhibits (the Exhibits).

9. A stenographer and a videographer licensed in the United States of America as a court reporter be permitted to attend the Examination for the purpose of preparing the Transcript and Video-Recording.

10. The Examiner forward the Transcript, the Video-Recording and the Exhibits to the Registrar pursuant to r 52.4 of the Rules.

11. A Registrar of the New South Wales Supreme Court comply with r 52.5 of the Rules by delivering a certificate and annexures to the Plaintiff for provision to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, and the attorneys for the parties to the US Proceeding set out at 12(b) and 12(c) below.

12. Advance notice of the Examination be given by the Examiner to:

1. Requesting Court:
   United States District Court for the District of Nevada
   333 Las Vegas Blvd South
   Las Vegas, NV 89101
   Tel: [phone]
   Email: [email protected]

2. Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the US Proceeding:
   Peter Swanson
   Gary Rubman
   Simeon Botwinick
   COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
   One CityCenter
   850 Tenth Street, NW, Washington DC 20001
   United States of America
   Tel: [phone]
   Email: [email protected]
   [email protected]
   [email protected]

3. Ziwei Song
   COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
   Salesforce Tower
   415 Mission Street, Suite 5400
   San Francisco, CA 94105
   United States of America
   Tel: [phone]
   Email: [email protected]

4. Nicholas J. Santoro
   Jason D. Smith
   Tyler B. Thomas
   SPENCER FANE LLP
   300 South 4^th Street, Suite 1600
   Las Vegas, NV 89101
   United States of America
   Tel.: [phone]
   Email: [email protected]
   [email protected]
   [email protected]

5. Attorneys for the Defendants in the US Proceeding:
   Philip R. Erwin
   CAMPBELL & WILLIAMS
   710 S. 7^th St., Ste. A
   Las Vegas, NV 89101
   United States of America
   Neal Manne
   Joseph Grinstein
   Rocco Magni
   SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P
   1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100
   Houston, TX, 77002
   United States of America

6. Erik Wilson
   SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P
   1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
   Los Angeles, CA 90067
   United States of America

7. Andrew Nassar
   SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P
   One Manhattan West, 50^th Fl.
   New York, NY 10001
   United States of America

8. Local counsel for the Plaintiff:
   Peter Munro
   Gilbert + Tobin
   L35, Tower Two, International Towers Sydney
   200 Barangaroo Avenue, Barangaroo NSW 2000
   Australia

9. Witness:
   Emma Charles
   [REDACTED]

10. Lloyd Sefton
    [REDACTED]

11. William Soo
    C/O Eugenia Ikonomou
    Matthew Folbigg Pty Ltd
    Level 7, 10-14 Smith Street
    Parramatta, NSW 2150
    PO Box 248 Parramatta, NSW 2124
    Australia

13. To the extent necessary, the Examination of the Witnesses, the Transcript and Video-Recording of the Examination, any Exhibits produced during the Examination, and the production of any documents by Charles or Sefton, (the Confidential Information) be governed by the confidentiality protections of the Confidentiality Agreement and Stipulated Protective Order agreed to by the parties in the US Proceeding, a copy of which is annexed to these orders and marked Annexure B.

14. The following be permitted to access, inspect and take copies of any Confidential Information for the purpose of this proceeding:

1. the Examiner;

2. local counsel for the Plaintiff; and

3. the Witnesses and their legal representatives.

15. The Notice of Motion filed 27 June 2025 be dismissed.

**********

Decision last updated: 16 July 2025