Last week, the forestry company unsuccessfully asked the court for permission to abandon a costly search for documents it was ordered to carry out.

Gunns lawyers claimed the search for information required by the litigants had so far cost $600,000 and involved checking 290,000 documents.

Barrister Scott Nixon argued that ``the amount that this process was costing when weighed in the balance against the amount the class members might ultimately recover revealed the presence of disproportion''.

Acting on behalf of those suing, barrister Marcus Pesman said that those party to the class action could potentially share in $35-75 million, and the costs of discovery had to be seen in that light.

On Friday, Judge Nye Perram dismissed the Gunns application as all parties had agreed to the terms of discovery in February.

He ordered Gunns to finish what it had started saying he might consider asking those suing Gunns to put up security for the cost at a later stage.

``But I do not think I should decide that now,'' he ruled.

``Nor do I think, on balance, that it would be fair to change the rules halfway through the process.''

In April last year, Maurice Blackburn filed legal proceedings against Gunns on behalf of more than 300 shareholders, who claim share losses are due to Gunns failing to adequately disclose information to the market.

A trial date is yet to be set.

Meanwhile, legal action brought by the Tasmanian Conservation Trust challenging Gunns' pulp mill permits continues. Gunns is appealing a court decision not to order the trust to provide security for the company's court costs in the event the action is unsuccessful. It is listed to be heard in the Supreme Court on July 26.