Gordon v KD Wood Valuations Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 699

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Gordon v KD Wood Valuations Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 699 PETER GORDON v KD WOOD VALUATIONS PTY LIMITED and ANDREW AITKEN, PETER McLACHLAN AND ANDREW THORPE N 1336 OF 2001 GYLES J SYDNEY 30 MAY 2002

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1336 OF 2000

BETWEEN: PETER GORDON

APPLICANT

AND: KD WOOD VALUATIONS PTY LTD

FIRST RESPONDENT

ANDREW AITKEN, PETER McLACHLAN AND ANDREW THORPE

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: GYLES J

DATE OF ORDER: 30 MAY 2002

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The motion of the first respondent of 14 May 2002 is dismissed. 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 1336 OF 2000

BETWEEN: PETER GORDON

APPLICANT

AND: KD WOOD VALUATIONS PTY LTD

FIRST RESPONDENT

ANDREW AITKEN, PETER McLACHLAN AND ANDREW THORPE

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: GYLES J

DATE: 30 MAY 2002

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR ORDER 1 On 30 May 2002 I dismissed an application by the first respondent in the proceeding, KD Wood Valuations Pty Ltd ("KD Wood"), to transfer the proceeding to the Supreme Court of New South Wales pursuant to the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) ("the Act") s 5(4). These are the reasons for that order. The application was filed by notice of motion on 14 May 2002. The motion was consented to by the second respondent in the proceeding but opposed by the applicant in the proceeding, Peter Gordon ("Gordon"). The following orders are sought: "1. That, pursuant to the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth), section 5(4), these proceedings be transferred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Equity Division). 2. The costs of the motion be costs of the transferred proceedings. 3. In the alternative to orders 1 and 2: (a) that the proceedings be stayed pending the completion of Proceedings No. 2501 of 2000 in the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Equity Division); and (b) the costs of the motion be costs in the cause. 4. Such further or other orders as the court thinks fit." 2 This motion is in identical terms to one filed by the same party in this proceeding on 8 July 2001. In an ex tempore judgment of 12 July 2001 (Gordon v KD Wood Valuations Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 737), I dismissed that motion. This judgment should be read with that judgment, which explains the relevant background.