CNOOC PETROLEUM NORTH AMERICA ULC v ITP SA

A group of Defendants, collectively referred to as the “Wood Group”, applied to compel the Plaintiff, CNOOC, to provide responses to undertakings. In making its determination, the Court considered the guidance provided in Rule 1.2 and what qualifies as relevant or material under Rule 5.2.

Associate Chief Justice Nixon noted that Rule 5.25 directs what questions must be answered. The Court also highlighted that Part 5 of the Rules provides that discovery can be used for the purposes of gaining admissions, regardless of whether the Questioning party may already know the answer.

The Court agreed that some undertakings were properly refused because there was no evidence supporting that the undertaking requested was relevant and material or because the request was overly broad.

CNOOC was directed to respond, or partially respond, to other undertakings which the Court considered to be relevant and material to one of the issues in the case.