Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Fine China Capital Investment Limited v Qi (No 2) [2023] FCA 1059 File number: VID 560 of 2023
Judgment of: MOSHINSKY J
Date of judgment: 29 August 2023
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – freezing order – inter partes hearing – whether existing freezing order should continue – whether applicant had established good arguable case – whether danger of dissipation of assets – held: freezing order continued
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 23 Federal Court Rules 2011, rr 7.33, 7.35
Cases cited: Basi v Namitha Nakul Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 743 Bayley & Associates Pty Ltd v DBR Australia Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 746 KTC v Singh [2018] NSWSC 1510 Hurst, in the matter of Lloyds Curry Shop Pty Ltd (in liq) v Prasad [2021] FCA 1562 Patterson v BTR Engineering (Aust) Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 319 Royal Express Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (Administrator Appointed) v Huang, in the matter of Royal Express Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 585 Spotlight Pty Ltd v Mehta [2019] FCA 1796
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Corporations and Corporate Insolvency
Number of paragraphs: 39
Date of hearing: 28 August 2023
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms L De Ferrari SC
Solicitor for the Applicant: AJH Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr A Pomerenke KC with Mr H Clift
Solicitor for the Respondent: Carswell & Company Solicitors
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