Federal Court of Australia
C A T C H W O R D S PRACTICE and PROCEDURE - summary judgment - strong prima facie case - including letter from respondent's former solicitors confirming respondent's obligation - director of respondent swearing full affidavit explaining circumstances - respondent's affidavit conflicting with affidavit filed by applicant - respondent's cross-claim abandoned on eve of summary judgment hearing - inconsistencies between matters relied upon in cross-claim and then contested by respondent/cross-claimant at hearing of summary judgment application - respondent/cross-complainant's conduct (including failure to provide security for costs as ordered) caused about six months delay to progress of application - evidence of very recent disposal by respondent of major asset - discretion to make such orders as the nature of the case requires - defence critically dependent upon credibility of witnesses - summary judgment ordered unless respondent brings into Court approximately one-third of amount in issue - whether Mareva injunction should also be granted. Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) O.20, r.1(1) Express Newspapers Plc v. News (UK) Ltd [1990] 3 All ER 376 Webster v. Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598 Fancourt v. Mercantile Credits Ltd (1982) 154 CLR 87 DMS Shipping & Trading Co Ltd v. Lionheart Asia Ltd (1996) 2 Qd R 20 Metro Taxi Management Pty Ltd v. Commissioner of State Taxation (W.A.) (1995) 95 ATC 4671 Peko-Wallsend Operations Ltd v. Commissioner of State Taxation (W.A.) (1989) 89 ATC 4,569 Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd v. Colonial Financiers of Australia Ltd [1972] VR 702 Tomlinson v. Cut Price Deli Pty Ltd (1992) 38 FCR 490 Riley McKay Pty Ltd v. McKay [1982] 1 NSWLR 264 CLC CORPORATION v. CAMBRIDGE GULF HOLDINGS NL & ORS No. WAG 74 of 1996 CARR J PERTH 9 APRIL 1997
IN THE FEDERAL COURT ) OF AUSTRALIA ) WESTERN AUSTRALIA ) DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. WAG 74 of 1996 GENERAL DIVISION ) B E T W E E N : CLC CORPORATION Applicant/First Cross-Respondent CAMBRIDGE GULF HOLDINGS NL First Respondent PENALE PTY LTD Second Respondent/First Cross-Claimant BRIAN JAMES DENNIS CONWAY Third Respondent/Second Cross-Claimant ROBERT GUY PITTORINO Second Cross-Respondent COUNTY NATWEST SECURITIES AUSTRALIA LIMITED Third Cross-Respondent ROBERT BAIN THOMAS Fourth Cross-Respondent CORAM: CARR J. PLACE: PERTH DATE: 9 APRIL 1997 MINUTE OF ORDERS THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Unless the second respondent pays into Court the sum of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) on or before 22 May 1997, judgment be entered for the applicant against the second respondent for damages to be assessed, but the operation of the order contained in this paragraph be stayed for 7 days to enable the second respondent to apply for a variation of its terms and the second respondent has leave to do so.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate