[LINK] Discovery, the bright new sword of the digital judiciary!

[Marghanita da Cruz]

Kim Holburn wrote:
> The electronic age and US law, somewhat chilling.  Not a great article  
> but some interesting links.
> 
> http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001090.html
> 
>> Horizon immediately asked to see practically everything the  
>> teenagers had said on their Facebook and MySpace profiles, in  
>> instant-messaging threads, text messages, e-mails, blog posts and  
>> whatever else the girls might have done online.
>>
>> The BeyesÂ’ lawyer, David Mazie at Mazie, Slater, Katz & Freeman,  
>> objected on the grounds that HorizonÂ’s demands violated the girlsÂ’  
>> privacy. He lost. So hard disks and web pages are being scoured in  
>> order for the case to proceed. Gathering and then sifting through  
>> all the electronic information that a few teenage girls have  
>> generated is excessive and daunting, says Mr Mazie.
> 

Not just teenage girls...in oz...

> 4 The trial lasted for 120 hearing days and took place in an electronic courtroom. Electronic trials have many advantages, but reducing the amount of documentation produced or relied on by the parties is not one of them. The outcome of the processes of discovery and production of documents in this case was an electronic database containing 85,653 documents, comprising 589,392 pages. Ultimately, 12,849 ‘documents’, comprising 115,586 pages, were admitted into evidence. The Exhibit List would have been very much longer had I not rejected the tender of substantial categories of documents that the parties, particularly Seven, wished to have in evidence.
> 
> 5 Quite apart from the evidence, the volume of written submissions filed by the parties was truly astonishing. Seven produced 1,556 pages of written Closing Submissions in Chief and 812 pages of Reply Submissions (not counting confidential portions of certain chapters and one electronic attachment containing spreadsheets which apparently runs for 8,900 or so pages). The Respondents managed to generate some 2,594 pages of written Closing Submissions between them. The partiesÂ’ Closing Submissions were supplemented by yet further outlines, notes and summaries. 
.....

> 10 It is difficult to understand how the costs incurred by the parties can be said to be proportionate to what is truly at stake, measured in financial terms. In my view, the expenditure of $200 million (and counting) on a single piece of litigation is not only extraordinarily wasteful, but borders on the scandalous.

<http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2007/1062.html?query=^channel%207>

Marghanita
-- 
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202