Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Hardcastle v Advanced Mining Technologies Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1854 PHILIP JULIAN HARDCASTLE v ADVANCED MINING TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD & ORS N 923 of 2001 EMMETT J 14 DECEMBER 2001 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 923 OF 2001
BETWEEN: PHILIP JULIAN HARDCASTLE
APPLICANT
AND: ADVANCED MINING TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD
ACN 060 418 859
FIRST RESPONDENT
HENDRIKUS THEODORUS VERHOEF
SECOND RESPONDENT
THOMAS BAINES GILPIN
THIRD RESPONDENT
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER: 14 DECEMBER 2001
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the proceeding. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 923 OF 2001
BETWEEN: PHILIP JULIAN HARDCASTLE
APPLICANT
AND: ADVANCED MINING TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD
ACN 060 418 859
FIRST RESPONDENT
HENDRIKUS THEODORUS VERHOEF
SECOND RESPONDENT
THOMAS BAINES GILPIN
THIRD RESPONDENT
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE: 14 DECEMBER 2001
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 I have before me, a motion for a summary dismissal of a proceeding brought by the respondents, Advanced Mining Technologies Pty Limited, Hendrikus Theodorus Verhoef and Thomas Baines Giplin. An amended statement of claim has been filed pursuant to leave that I granted on 10 September 2001 . The notice of motion is directed to the amended statement of claim. 2 The amended statement of claim alleges causes of action in fraud and unjust enrichment. On the face of the pleading, there is no federal element at all that would give this Court jurisdiction to entertain the claims. The claims are made against the second and third respondents on the basis of alleged misrepresentations, made prior to the entry into of agreements by the applicant, relating to shares in the first respondent. 3 The applicant appears in person. When the applicant was asked to identify the Court's jurisdiction, he referred to the Corporations Act 1989 (Cth). Under s 1337B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ("the Act"), jurisdiction is conferred on the Federal Court of Australia with respect to civil matters arising under the Corporations legislation. The applicant referred to s 185 of the Act which provides: "Sections 180 to 184: (a) have effect in addition to, and not in derogation of, any rule of law relating to the duty of liability of a person because of their office or employment in relation to a corporation; and (b) do not prevent the commencement of civil proceedings for a breach of duty or in respect of such a liability referred to in paragraph (a). … … … … … … …" Sections 180 to 184 are concerned with the duties of directors: · to act diligently,
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