Kim v Wang (No 2) [2023] FCAFC 122

Federal Court of Australia

Kim v Wang (No 2) [2023] FCAFC 122 Appeal from: Kim v Hodgson Faraday Pty Limited [2022] FCA 1190

File number: NSD 972 of 2022

Judgment of: MOSHINSKY, LEE AND JACKMAN JJ

Date of judgment: 3 August 2023

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – remitter – residual claim for compensation by representative applicant and claim for relief remitted to trial Judge – balance of the proceedings remitted for case management – orders made

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Pt IVA, s 33ZB Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 2.43(1)

Cases cited: Kim v Wang [2023] FCAFC 115

Division: General Division

Registry: New South Wales

National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations

Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection

Number of paragraphs: 7

Date of hearing: Determined on the papers

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr BW Walker SC with Mr JE Mack and Mr TL Bagley

Solicitor for the Appellant: RESURGAM Law Corporation

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr DR Pritchard SC with Mr AJ Macauley

Solicitor for the Respondent: KPL Lawyers

ORDERS NSD 972 of 2022

BETWEEN: KWANGHO KIM Appellant

AND: YINGJIE WANG Respondent

order made by: MOSHINSKY, LEE AND JACKMAN JJ DATE OF ORDER: 3 AUGUST 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The individual claim for compensation by the representative applicant be remitted to a trial Judge to determine, in conformity with the judgment of the Full Court, any entitlement to statutory compensation or other relief. 2. The balance of the proceedings, including the conduct of any group member claims, be remitted to the trial Judge for further case management. 3. Pursuant to rule 2.43(1) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), all amounts paid into Court by or on behalf of Mr Kim as security for Mr Wang's costs of the proceedings, and any interest accrued on those amounts, be paid to the solicitor for the appellant, RESURGAM Law Corporation. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.