NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Sun v He [2020] NSWSC 802 Hearing dates: 12-13 May 2020 Date of orders: 26 June 2020 Decision date: 26 June 2020 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Ward CJ in Eq Decision: 1. Declare that the first defendant was in contempt of this Court by engaging in the conduct in the circumstances described in each of Charges 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Statement of Charge annexed to the plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 18 February 2020. 2. List the matter before me at 8.30am on 30 June 2020 for further directions as to the filing of evidence and listing of the matter for a sentencing hearing in respect of the contempt of court committed by the first defendant. 3. Reserve the question of costs. Catchwords: CONTEMPT — Criminal contempt — Intentional conduct — Interference with administration of justice — where deliberate and intentional destruction of items subject to search and seizure orders — where other contemptuous conduct Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Anderson v Hassett [2007] NSWSC 1310 Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175; [2009] HCA 27 Arrow Nominees Inc v Blackledge [2000] EWCA Civ 200 Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales (2006) 226 CLR 256; [2006] HCA 27 British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Cowell (2002) 7 VR 524; [2002] VSCA 197 Clark v State of New South Wales (2006) 66 NSWLR 640; [2006] NSWSC 673 Clark v State of New South Wales [2012] NSWCA 139 Farahbakht v Midas Australia Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 1322 Fuji Xerox Australia Pty Ltd v Lee [2003] QSC 303 Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd v SST Consulting Pty Ltd (2009) 239 CLR 75; [2009] HCA 43 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298; [1959] HCA 8 Lane v Registrar of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Equity Division) (1981) 148 CLR 245; [1981] HCA 35 Mead v Mead [2007] HCA 25; (2007) 235 ALR 197 Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427; [2011] HCA 48 Mirus Australia Pty Ltd v Gage [2017] NSWSC 1046 Moody Kiddell & Partners Pty Ltd v Arkell [2013] FCA 1066 Palavi v Queensland Newspapers Pty Ltd (2012) 84 NSWLR 523; [2012] NSWCA 182 Palavi v Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 264 Perera v GetSwift Ltd (2018) 263 FCR 92; [2018] FCAFC 202 Rogers v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 251; [1994] HCA 42 Shepherd v The Queen [1990] 170 CLR 573; [1990] HCA 56 Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 507; [2015] HCA 28 UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77; [2018] HCA 45 Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd (1990) 171 CLR 538; [1990] HCA 55 Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378; [1993] HCA 77 Williams v Spautz (1992) 174 CLR 509; [1992] HCA 34 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Bo Sun (Plaintiff) Xin He aka Ethan He (First Defendant) Third Master Capital Pty Ltd (ACN 622 150 369) (Second Defendant) Level 24 Holdings Pty Ltd (ACN 622 146 490) (Third Defendant) Fourth Master Capital Pty Ltd (ACN 622 745 420) (Fourth Defendant) Ethan He and Vivian Zhang Pty Ltd (ACN 169 451 718) (Ninth Defendant) Second Master Capital Pty Ltd (ACN 622 077 696) (Thirteenth Defendant) Lei Zhang (Fourteenth Defendant) EVE Property Solutions Pty Ltd (ACN 155 290 958) (Fifteenth Defendant) Representation: Counsel: M Pesman SC with T Bors (Plaintiff) R de Meyrick with D Currie (Defendants)
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