Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Trilogy Funds Management Limited v Sullivan (No 2) [2015] FCA 1452 Citation: Trilogy Funds Management Limited v Sullivan (No 2) [2015] FCA 1452
Parties: TRILOGY FUNDS MANAGEMENT LIMITED (ACN 080 383 679) AS THE RESPONSIBLE ENTITY FOR THE PACIFIC FIRST MORTGAGE FUND (ARSN 088 139 477) v PHILIP KEITH SULLIVAN, THOMAS WILLIAM SWAN, STEPHEN ANTHONY MCCORMICK and IAN WILLIAM DONALDSON
File number: NSD 604 of 2012
Judge: WIGNEY J
Date of judgment: 18 December 2015
Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – directors – officers – statutory duties of directors – duty of care and diligence – duties of a responsible entity of a registered managed investment scheme pursuant to s 601FC of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – duties of directors and officers of a responsible entity pursuant to s 601FD of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – standard of care and diligence for directors and officers of a responsible entity acting as a professional trustee – duty of officers of a responsible entity to act in the best interests of scheme members – duty of officers to take steps to ensure responsible entity complies with Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), scheme constitution and compliance plan – where the directors and officers of a responsible entity of a registered managed investment scheme approved or purportedly approved the increase of a loan facility in circumstances where scheme constitution and compliance plan not complied with – whether directors and officers of a responsible entity of a managed investment scheme acted with care and diligence in approving increase to loan facility – where advances above the approved limit of loan facility – whether directors or officers of a responsible entity of a managed investment scheme failed to exercise care and diligence in failing to prevent advances being made – whether non-executive directors entitled to rely on management and auditors – failure of directors and officers to comply with the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – contravention of s 601FD of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – contravention resulting in loss – compensation orders under s 1317H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – causation – relevant principles of causation in context of s 1317H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – where contraveners claim that loss inevitable irrespective of contraventions – where contraveners claim failure to mitigate loss resulting from contraventions – principles relating to mitigation of loss in context of compensation orders under s 1317H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – exoneration – whether directors and officers ought fairly to be excused for contraventions pursuant to ss 1317S and 1318 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) EVIDENCE – admissibility – opinion evidence – expert's field of specialised knowledge – whether specialised knowledge demonstrated – whether demonstrated that opinions based on specialised knowledge – whether probative value of opinion evidence substantially outweighed by danger of undue waste of time or unfair prejudice – Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss 76, 79, 135 REAL PROPERTY – valuations – land value – "as is" valuations – highest and best use of land – whether expert valuer is required to consider the possibility of rezoning of land when preparing valuation of land DAMAGES – losses resulting from contraventions of s 601FD of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) by directors and officers of a registered managed investment scheme – whether the responsible entity of a registered managed investment scheme failed to act reasonably to mitigate the loss – whether the responsible entity of a registered managed investment scheme is entitled to a compensation order pursuant to s 1317H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – relevant principles of causation and loss – test for causation and loss – whether any damage suffered by the responsible entity "resulted from" contraventions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – where contraveners claim that loss would have been suffered irrespective of contraventions – method of calculating loss
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