Friedrich v Herald and Weekly Times Ltd

It is against that background that I now approach the specific provisions of the Corporations Law. I am satisfied that there are a number of sources of power available to the liquidator to do that which he does not oppose doing, namely to make available the documents which were utilised in the examination either by directly being marked for identification or as otherwise being produced for the examination. I see no sensible distinction being drawn between the two categories of document. The documents not marked for identification were still capable of informing the examination and influencing the questions asked. Indeed the liquidator's submissions appear to favour that access. Thus I would include in any access all documents produced, in the absence of any evidence from those opposing access that a document was produced which was entirely extraneous to any possible purpose of the original examination. (my emphasis) 57It seems to me that the order for access to transcript should include access or inspection of the documents provided to each of Messrs Ryan and Sheedy and marked for identification in the course of the examinations as sought by BMC. Orders 58Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, I propose to make the following orders:

1. Pursuant to s 596F(1)(e) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), I direct that the applicant be provided (on payment of the requisite fee or otherwise at its cost) with a copy of (or otherwise be permitted to inspect and take a copy of): (a) the transcript taken of the examinations of Mr Ryan and Mr Sheedy on 13 May 2011 and on any later date; and (b) the documents provided to each of Mr Ryan and Mr Sheedy and marked for identification in the course of their examinations.
2. I direct that the examinations of Mr Ryan and Mr Sheedy be treated as if they had been examinations held in public.
3. I vary order 5 of the orders made on 13 June 2011 such that there is no longer a restriction on access to, or requirement that it be kept confidential, the transcript of the examinations of Mr Ryan and Mr Sheedy. 59Before finalising the above orders, I will give the parties an opportunity to make any submissions as to the form of those orders by notifying my Associate by 1 July 2011. 60I consider that the appropriate order would be for BMC to pay the costs of the application by Wambo but will hear submissions on this aspect of the matter if any party wishes to make such submissions (in which case they should notify my Associate by 1 July 2011, failing which I will make the order so foreshadowed).

---

DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 24 June 2011