IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA TRALIAN TAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION RECEIVE) =POct 1994 FEDERAL COURT Or AUSTRALIA PRINCIPAL REGISTRY BETWEEN: JUDGMENT No. wat! 2 af PR, No. ACT G 29 of 1992 ee ee ew ADOROLL PTY LIMITED ROENTGEN _ PTY LIMITED THERN _PLUMBIN PPLIE PTY LIMITED, BALESCOPE PTY LIMITED, WILLIAM BRIAN LOFT ALDPOST PTY LIMITED ANTHONY _ WILLIAM RIFFIN ANTHONY W GRIFFIN PTY LIMITED, HELEN GRIFFIN, HAMERLEEN PTY LIMITED, ALFRED NATHAN LESTER, LESTER FIRTH A IATES PTY LIMITED ADOLPHE FREDERICK BEUTLER HILLTRATE PTY LIMITED, MODOC PTY LIMITED, KENNETH JAMES CALLAUGHAN, ROY WILLIAM ELLIS, BRIAN DAVID BACKHOUSE, RIDGE CONSOLIDATED PTY LIMITED and MADELINE MARIE LESTER Applicants ALLEGRA RPORATION LIMITED First Respondent ALLEGRA INVESTMENTS LIMITED Second Respondent MAUNTILL PTY LIMITED Third Respondent PEGASUS LEASING LIMITED Fourth Respondent MICHAEL EORGE INCLAIR MARUTA PEARSON and MICHAEL MARKO ZIVKOVIC trading as FARNHAM SINCLAIR & ASSOCIATES Fifth Respondents MINUTE OF ORDER DGE MAKIN RDER : Neaves J. DATE OF ORDER f] 5 October 1994 WHERE MADE : Canberra THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applicants have liberty to file and serve on or before 4 November 1994 a further amended statement of claim. The motions on behalf of the third respondent and the first named of the fifth respondents and on behalf of the fourth respondent, in respect of each of which notice was filed on 26 April 1994, and the motion on behalf of the first and second respondents, notice of which was filed on 13 May 1994, be adjourned for mention on 21 November 1994. The costs of the motions be reserved. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY ) ) No. ACT G 29 of 1992 GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: CADOROLL PTY LIMITED, ROENTGEN PTY LIMITED, SOUTHERN PLUMBING SUPPLIES PTY LIMITED, BALESCOPE PTY LIMITED WILLIAM BRIAN __LOFTU. ALDPOST PTY LIMITED ANTHONY WILLIAM RIFFIN ANTHONY W GRIFFIN PTY LIMITED, HELEN GRIFFIN HAMERLEEN PTY LIMITED ALFRED NATHAN LESTER LESTER FIRTH ASSOCIATES PTY LIMITED, ADOLPHE FREDERICK BEUTLER, HILLTRATE PTY LIMITED, MODOC PTY LIMITED, KENNETH JAMES CALLAUGHAN, ROY WILLIAM ELLI BRIAN DAVID BACKHOUSE, RIDGE CONSOLIDATED PTY LIMITED and MADELINE MARIE LESTER Applicants AND: ALLEGRA CORPORATION LIMITED First Respondent ALLEGRA INVESTMENTS LIMITED Second Respondent MAUNTILL PTY LIMITED Third Respondent PEGASUS LEASING LIMITED Fourth Respondent MICHAEL GEORGE SINCLAIR, MARUTA PEARSON and MICHAEL MARKO ZIVKOVIC trading as FARNHAM SINCLAIR & AS IATE Fifth Respondents CORAM: Neaves J. DATE: 5 October 1994 2. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Before the Court are three motions each seeking orders that the amended statement of claim filed on behalf of the applicants on 3 March 1994, or alternatively a number of paragraphs of that amended statement of claim, be struck out and for consequential orders. The first of the three motions, notice of which was filed on 26 April 1994, is made by the third respondent to the proceeding, Mauntill Pty Limited, and by the first named of the fifth respondents, Michael George Sinclair trading, with Maruta Pearson and Michael Marko Zivkovic, as Farnham Sinclair & Associates. The second of the three motions, notice of which was also filed on 26 April 1994, is made by the fourth respondent, Pegasus Leasing Limited. The third of the motions, notice of which was filed on 13 May 1994, is made by the first and second respondents, Allegra Corporation Limited and Allegra Investments Limited. The motions are made under 0.11, r.16, pars (a) and (b) of the Federal Court Rules. The motions are made in a proceeding, numbered ACT G 29 of 1992, pending in this Court. That proceeding was commenced by application filed on 2 July 1992. The application names 22 parties as applicants, being 12 corporations and 10 individuals. When the present motions came on for hearing counsel for the applicants sought and was granted leave to file notices of discontinuance on behalf of two of the applicants, Sridot Pty Limited and Peter Robert Henry. The respondents to the proceeding have been identified 3. in the preceding paragraph of these reasons. MThe proceeding relates to a thoroughbred bloodstock breeding partnership known as "The Capricorn Park No 4 Breeding Partnership". The motions before the Court raise issues similar to those raised by the motions filed in the proceeding in this Court numbered ACT G 18 of 1992 and on which judgment has been given this day. Other matters also require attention. Paragraphs 9, 12 and 17 and the Schedules require amendment to delete the references to Sridot Pty Limited and Peter Robert Henry. It is to be noted that one of the applicants, William Brian Loftus, is not mentioned in par.9 though that circumstance does not appear to be reflected in other paragraphs of the amended statement of claim. Subparagraphs 9(d) and 12(iv) refer to Michael George Sinclair having a conversation with J.W. Firth on his own behalf, yet J.W. Firth is not a party to the proceeding. Subparagraph 18(a) provides no sufficient basis to support the alleged falsity of any of the representations alleged in pars 16 and 17 at least so far as the respondents other than Michael George Sinclair are concerned. For those reasons and for reasons similar to those set out in the judgment in proceeding numbered ACT G 18 of 1992, the motions are adjourned to allow the applicants a period within which to file and serve, if so advised, a further amended statement of claim. to file and serve a further amended statement of claim, same is to be filed and 4. If the applicants propose the served on or before 4 November 1994. The motions will be listed for mention on 21 November 1994. The costs of the motions Counsel for the applicant Solicitors for the applic Counsel for the first and second respondents Solicitors for the first second respondents Counsel for the third res Solicitors for the third Counsel for the fourth re Solicitors for the fourth respondent Counsel for the first nam fifth respondents Solicitors for the first the fifth respondents Date of hearing are reserved. I certify that this and the preceding 3 pages are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Neaves. Dated: 5 October 199 Mr B.R. McClintock Minter Ellison Morris Fletcher ants Mr R.J. Arthur and Phillips Fox Mr R.J. Weber Blake Dawson Waldron pondent respondent: spondent : Mr R.C. Refshauge : Macphillamy Cummins & : Gibson ed of the : Mr R.J. Weber named of : Blake Dawson Waldron « 24 May 1994