[2] The applicants in these proceedings oppose the making of such an order and say that the need for confidentiality has not been made out and, in any event, an order is unnecessary because DP World's concerns about the use and disclosure of particular documents are adequately protected by the implied undertaking to which the applicants and their legal representative are subject to as discussed in Harman v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2015] FWC 4542
Fair Work Commission|2015-07-06|Before: Deputy President Gostencnik, President Gostencnik
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
Parties
Applicant/Plaintiff:
[2] The applicants in these proceedings oppose the making of such an order and say that the need for confidentiality has not been made out and, in any event, an order is unnecessary because DP World's concerns about the use and disclosure of particular documents are adequately protected by the implied undertaking to which the applicants and their legal representative are subject to as discussed in Harman