The Federal Court has told Credit Suisse and UBS to give insurer respondents unredacted documents, setting aside Swiss and Luxembourg secrecy laws.
Justice Thawley's May 18, 2026 ruling lands in proceeding NSD 169 of 2023 - one of eleven matters comprising the Greensill Proceedings. The respondents include Insurance Australia Limited, Greensill Bank AG, the bank's insolvency administrator, BCC Trade Credit, Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co., Tokio Marine Management (Australasia), and Marsh.
The Credit Suisse Funds - two Luxembourgish entities - claim more than $2.2 billion from the respondents, according to the judgment. They came to Australia. They invoked federal misleading-conduct laws. And when discovery rolled around, they handed over documents heavily blacked out under three labels: "CID" for customer identifying data, "LOS" for laws of Switzerland, and "LOL" for laws of Luxembourg.
The redactions were applied by the Credit Suisse Funds and three UBS entities that succeeded Credit Suisse companies after the August 2024 merger. Disclose what's underneath, Credit Suisse argued, and their people could face criminal charges back home.
Justice Thawley wasn't buying it.
"A party to litigation, including a foreigner, is ordinarily required to play by the local rules, including by producing discoverable documents wherever those documents are located," he wrote, quoting an earlier English judgment. "If you join the game you must play according to the local rules."
BCC Trade Credit and the two Tokio Marine entities - the fourth, sixth and seventh respondents - brought the application. Their lawyers, Justin Williams SC and Daniel Farinha (instructed by Kennedys Australasia), argued the blacked-out material went to defences on causation, contributory negligence and proportionate liability. One of their solicitors reviewed roughly 5,000 of 6,891 documents with Swiss redactions, and all 806 with Luxembourg redactions, over two weeks. He found more than 400 documents with inconsistent redactions between versions or across email chains. Some blackouts had been applied to "terms of obvious relevance to the proceedings."
That, Justice Thawley said, was "likely to hamper the orderly conduct of the trial."
Credit Suisse called expert evidence on the foreign laws. Switzerland's Article 47 makes disclosure of confidential customer information a criminal offence, with penalties of up to five years in prison or CHF 540,000 in fines for individuals; if no individual can be identified due to inadequate organisation, the bank itself can be fined up to CHF 5 million. Luxembourg's Article 41 carries imprisonment of eight days to six months and fines of 500 to 5,000 euros under Article 458 of its Criminal Code.
The judge said the risk was overstated. "There is not one example of Swiss or Luxembourg authorities prosecuting for disclosure made in the context of a Swiss or Luxembourg bank (or institution) litigating abroad," he wrote.
He also pointed out that many of the documents almost certainly exist outside Switzerland. The application targeted emails sent by Credit Suisse executives Eric Varvel (United States), Lara Warner (London), and Helman Sitohang (thought to be in Singapore). Credit Suisse had itself argued in earlier UK proceedings that only information sourced from Switzerland and disclosed in Switzerland is caught by the Swiss law.
He was also unimpressed with how the redactions had been applied. Reviewers had been told to redact information "connected to, or disclosed in the context of, a client-bank relationship." That instruction, the judge said, was "at the least inaccurate and, at worst, is capable of being understood as going materially beyond what Swiss banking secrecy law requires."
The management agreements between the Credit Suisse Funds and their fund manager already allowed disclosure where a party was "compelled or authorised to do so by law or by any court of competent jurisdiction." Whether equivalent terms existed with the underlying bank customers - and whether Credit Suisse had asked for consent - wasn't put before the court.
Production is due by June 12, 2026. Credit Suisse and UBS were ordered to pay the costs of the application.
