Loxias Technologies Pty Ltd v Curacel International Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 753

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Loxias Technologies Pty Ltd v Curacel International Pty Ltd

[2002] FCA 753

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Pleadings – strike out application – whether breach of duty as a director properly pleaded – whether pleadings fail to distinguish between section 52 claim and negligence claim – whether nature of the loss suffered and how it is linked to the unlawful conduct of the respondents properly pleaded. PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – security for costs – whether applicants should provide security for costs based on the respondents' estimated legal costs up to and including any final hearing – where evidence of the applicants' impecuniosity inconclusive – where respondents have not yet filed a defence – where applicants' impecuniosity, if proved, is alleged to result from respondents' unlawful conduct Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s56 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1335 Federal Court Rules O 28 r 3 Daniels v Anderson (1995) 37 NSWLR 438 referred to Sheahan (as liquidator of SA Service Stations) (in liq) v Verco (2001) 37 ACSR 117 referred to Fraser v NRMA Holdings Ltd (1995) 55 FCR 452 referred to

LOXIAS TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD AND CURATHERAPY DISTRIBUTION PTY LTD AND SCOTT FRANCIS TYNE v CURACEL INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD and BILL ELLIOT CHAM

N166 of 2001

MOORE J 14 JUNE 2002 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 166 OF 2002

BETWEEN: LOXIAS TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD

FIRST APPLICANT

CURATHERAPY DISTRIBUTION PTY LTD

SECOND APPLICANT

SCOTT FRANCIS TYNE

THIRD APPLICANT

AND: CURACEL INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD

FIRST RESPONDENT

BILL ELLIOT CHAM

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: MOORE J

DATE OF ORDER: 14 JUNE 2002