[2025] NSWSC 759

Siabon Seet v NA NA

Summons granted.

Catchwords

CIVIL LAW – orders to facilitate the taking of evidence of commission – request from overseas court – statutory criteria satisfied – delightfully succinct submissions – no question of principle

Cases cited

Legislation cited

Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW), § 32(1), 33
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), § 24.1-24.3, 24.7-24.16, 24.20, 52, 52.1(1)(a), 52.1-52.6

Judgment

[1]
By summons filed on 13 June 2025, the plaintiff seeks a raft of orders pursuant to the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW) (“the Act”) and in compliance with r 52 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
[2]
The plaintiff is a partner of an Australian law firm Gilbert + Tobin, and has been nominated to undertake that role by a court in the United States, namely the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (“Nevada District Court”).
[3]
The summons is supported by the plaintiff’s affidavit which in turn annexes or incorporates a number of relevant documents, including information relating to the United States proceedings; the relevant witnesses who reside in New South Wales, and there are three of them; and critically for present purposes a request from the Nevada District Court which falls within the ambit of s 32(1) of the Act.
[4]
The orders sought in the summons that was originally filed have been amended, and an amended summons was included in an application book, as we decided to call it, which was marked Exhibit A.
[5]
I have also received helpful and delightfully succinct submissions from Ms Keesing of counsel.
[6]
I am satisfied that the statutory prerequisites of s 32 are satisfied:
[7]
I am also satisfied that the orders set out in the summons as amended for the kinds the orders contemplated by s 33, that is, that they facilitate or make provision for the attendance of the relevant witnesses and their compulsion to attend, if necessary, and for the examination as requested by the overseas court.
[8]
In view of what I will call simply and, as politely as I can, the imperatives operating in the duty court today, and in view of the comprehensive material filed in support of the summons, all of which will be on the file, I see no utility in providing further reasons for making the orders sought in the summons.
[9]
Accordingly, I will make the orders in the summons:
1. (1)
  Leave be granted, pursuant to sections 33 of the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW) (the Act) and r 52.1(1)(a) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (the Rules), to issue a subpoena to each of Emma Charles (Charles), Lloyd Sefton (Sefton), and William Soo (Soo) (together, the Witnesses) to give evidence, and in the case of Charles and Sefton produce documents, in the form annexed to these orders and marked Annexure A (the Subpoenas).
2. (2)
  Direct that a sealed copy of these orders be served on each of the Witnesses concurrently with service of the relevant Subpoena by no later than 5pm, 14 July 2025.
3. (3)
  Naomi Sharp SC of the New South Wales Bar, or another suitable person, be appointed as examiner pursuant to s 33 of the Act and/or r 24.3 of the Rules (the Examiner).
4. (4)
  The examination be conducted in accordance with r 52.1 to 52.6, 24.1 to 24.3, 24.7 to 24.16 and 24.20 of the Rules, subject to any variations to the operation of those procedures set out in these orders (the Examination).
5. (5)
  The Examiner conduct the Examination at the offices of Gilbert + Tobin, Level 35, Tower 2/200 Barangaroo Avenue, Sydney, New South Wales, at a convenient time, but no later than 29 August 2025.
6. (6)
  At the Examination, oral examination (including cross-examination and re-examination, either in person or by videoconference) of the Witnesses be permitted to be conducted by the US attorneys for the parties in Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. and Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Light & Wonder, Inc., LNW Gaming, Inc. and SciPlay Corporation, 2:24-cv-00382-GMN-MDC, before the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (the US Proceeding) on the deposition topics annexed to each of the Subpoenas annexed to these orders.
7. (7)
  Each of the Witnesses be sworn or affirmed before evidence is taken.
8. (8)
  The Examiner cause:
9. (9)
  A stenographer and a videographer licensed in the United States of America as a court reporter be permitted to attend the Examination for the purpose of preparing the Transcript and Video-Recording.
10. (10)
  The Examiner forward the Transcript, the Video-Recording and the Exhibits to the Registrar pursuant to r 52.4 of the Rules.
11. (11)
  A Registrar of the New South Wales Supreme Court comply with r 52.5 of the Rules by delivering a certificate and annexures to the Plaintiff for provision to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, and the attorneys for the parties to the US Proceeding set out at 12(b) and 12(c) below.
12. (12)
  Advance notice of the Examination be given by the Examiner to:
13. (13)
  To the extent necessary, the Examination of the Witnesses, the Transcript and Video-Recording of the Examination, any Exhibits produced during the Examination, and the production of any documents by Charles or Sefton, (the Confidential Information) be governed by the confidentiality protections of the Confidentiality Agreement and Stipulated Protective Order agreed to by the parties in the US Proceeding, a copy of which is annexed to these orders and marked Annexure B.
14. (14)
  The following be permitted to access, inspect and take copies of any Confidential Information for the purpose of this proceeding:
15. (15)
  The Notice of Motion filed 27 June 2025 be dismissed.