Thomas v SMP (International) Pty Ltd (No 2)

The dispute arose between Thomas and SMP (International) Pty Ltd, with the former seeking to set aside a subpoena issued by the latter. The subpoena required Thomas to give evidence about SMP's creditworthiness and financial standing. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary legal issue was whether the subpoena could be set aside, focusing on the principles governing such applications and whether SMP had a valid basis to compel Thomas's testimony.

The court examined the principles applicable to setting aside subpoenas, particularly the need for the subpoena to serve a relevant and legitimate purpose. It also considered the nature of the relationship between the parties, whether it was purely commercial or involved a fiduciary duty, which could influence the court's approach. The court determined that SMP, while having a commercial interest in Thomas's creditworthiness, did not owe Thomas a fiduciary duty. The court balanced the competing considerations, including the necessity of the subpoena for SMP's case and the potential prejudice to Thomas if compelled to testify.

After weighing the principles and the context of the relationship, the court found that the subpoena could be set aside. The court emphasised that while SMP had a legitimate interest in Thomas's financial standing, the subpoena was not necessary for the fair administration of justice, and it would cause undue hardship to Thomas. Therefore, the subpoena was set aside.

The court ordered that the subpoena issued by SMP (International) Pty Ltd be set aside and that Thomas would not be required to give evidence as per the subpoena. The decision underscored the importance of the principles governing subpoenas and the need to protect parties from unnecessary and potentially prejudicial disclosures.