Meadow Springs Fairway Resort Ltd (In liquidation) v Colliers International Consultancy and Valuation Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 531

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Meadow Springs Fairway Resort Ltd (In liquidation) v Colliers International Consultancy and Valuation Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 531 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application under O 29 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) – proposal to split trial in relation to second applicants only – whether just and convenient – whether savings in time and expense – no significant savings in time and expense demonstrated – application dismissed Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth), O 29 r 2 Council of the City of Sydney v Goldspar Australia Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 641, cited Dovuro Pty Limited v Wilkins (2003) 215 CLR 317, applied Liberty Financial Pty Ltd v Scott [2003] FCA 226, followed Reading Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Mutual Provident Society (1999) 217 ALR 495, followed Save the Ridge Inc v Commonwealth (2005) 147 FCR 97, cited Tepko Pty Limited v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1, applied Unity Insurance Brokers Pty Limited v Rocco Pezzano Pty Limited (1998) 193 CLR 603, cited MEADOW SPRINGS FAIRWAY RESORT LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (ACN 084 358 592) AND JENNIFER AMER AND OTHERS v COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANCY AND VALUATION PTY LTD (ACN 076 848 112) WAD 126 OF 2004 MARSHALL J

12 APRIL 2007

MELBOURNE (BY VIDEOLINK TO pERTH) IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY WAD 126 OF 2004

BETWEEN: MEADOW SPRINGS FAIRWAY RESORT LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (ACN 084 358 592)

First Applicant

JENNIFER AMER AND OTHERS

Second Applicants

AND: COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANCY AND VALUATION PTY LTD (ACN 076 848 112)

Respondent

JUDGE: MARSHALL J DATE OF ORDER: 12 APRIL 2007

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application by the first applicant and the second applicants (other than Kids Holdings Pty Ltd) under O 29 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) is dismissed. 2. The applicants referred to in the preceding paragraph of this order pay the respondent's costs of, and incidental to, that application.