› Whether recourse to extrinsic material including reasons for judgment is permissible
› Collins v Marinovich (No 2) (2023) 16 QR 50
Quick Take
1A discovery order requiring disclosure of documents 'relating to the business of [an entity] (including potential business opportunities)' extends to documents concerning the diversion of those opportunities to a competing entity, even where the documents do not specifically mention the original entity — the phrase 'potential business opportunities' does not require the opportunity to have crystallised.
2An indorsement of claim that is not headed as a statement of claim does not constitute a 'pleading' under r 5.04(3) of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2025 (Vic), and a party may not narrow the scope of a pre-pleading discovery order by interpreting it through the prism of the indorsement.
3Access to material delivered up for preservation and inspection is not governed by s 55 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) (discovery) but by rr 34.01 and 37.01; applying Fortescue Limited v Element Zero Pty Limited (No 3), the court must be satisfied there are reasonable grounds for being fairly certain that other relevant documents exist beyond those already discovered.
