Walker v Gibbston Water Services Ltd

The application for review by the applicants, who are also the respondents in the substantive proceeding, was made against the decision of the Associate Judge declining an application for discovery by the applicants. The applicants sought orders for discovery relating to communications and documents between Mr Robert Bruce Walker, the liquidator of Gibbston Water Holdings Limited, and various other named parties. The applicants argued that the discovery was relevant to the issues in the proceeding, including the liquidator's conduct and the validity of the orders he sought. The Associate Judge declined the application for discovery on the basis that the documents were not relevant to the issues in the proceeding and did not meet the test for proportionality. The applicants sought a review of that decision on the basis of various alleged errors by the Associate Judge.

The court considered the arguments made by the applicants and the liquidator. The court found that the Associate Judge's decision not to accept the informal application under s 284 of the Companies Act 1993 was correct. The applicants needed to satisfy the Court that they fell within the classes of persons who were entitled to seek leave under s 284 of the Companies Act. The court also found that the applicants had not demonstrated that the documents requested were relevant to the issues in the proceeding, and that the requirement of proportionality of discovery under r 8.2 of the High Court Rules would not be met if an order was granted for the wide-ranging discovery sought by the applicants.

The application for review of the Associate Judge’s decision dated 28 February 2014 to decline the orders sought for discovery is dismissed. The liquidator is directed to file a memorandum on costs within 14 days of this judgment, and any memorandum in opposition to an award of costs is to be filed within a further 14 days of receipt of the memorandum seeking costs.