SP&G Nominees Pty Ltd v Stumer, Ex parte A-G of Cth

The applicant, SP&G Nominees Pty Ltd, sought to set aside a subpoena issued by the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, directed to a third party, Mr. Stumer. The subpoena was issued in connection with an investigation into alleged contraventions of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) by SP&G Nominees. The application was heard by Callinan J in chambers.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the subpoena, which sought documents relating to the financial affairs of SP&G Nominees, was oppressive and an abuse of process. SP&G Nominees contended that the subpoena was overly broad, sought irrelevant information, and was issued for an improper purpose, namely to gain an unfair advantage in anticipated litigation.

Callinan J considered the principles governing the issue of subpoenas in the context of investigations under the *Trade Practices Act*. His Honour noted that while the Attorney-General has broad powers to investigate, these powers are not unfettered and must be exercised reasonably. The Court applied the test for oppression, which requires a demonstration that compliance with the subpoena would be unduly burdensome or vexatious. His Honour found that the subpoena, as issued, was not oppressive, as the documents sought were relevant to the investigation and the potential for future litigation did not render the subpoena an abuse of process.

The application to set aside the subpoena was dismissed.