Neil Brooks v Peter Giddings Pty Limited and anor and Neil Brooks v Peter Giddings Pty Limited and ors [2007] NSWIRComm 277

Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales in Court Session

CITATION: Neil Brooks v Peter Giddings Pty Limited and anor and Neil Brooks v Peter Giddings Pty Limited and ors [2007] NSWIRComm 277

APPLICANT (in both matters) Neil Brooks

RESPONDENTS (in 1313 of 2005) PARTIES: Peter Giddings Pty Limited Peter Giddings RESPONDENTS (in 1314 of 2005) Peter Giddings Pty Limited Ealico Pty Limited Peter Giddings

FILE NUMBER(S): 1313; 1314 of 2005

CORAM: Marks J

CATCHWORDS: Unfair contract s106 proceedings - interlocutory proceedings - motion for Mareva orders - consideration of relevant principles of preservation orders - need to establish prima facie cause of action and danger of disposal of assets - applicant must establish entitlement to maintain substantive proceedings and satisfy court that it has jurisdiction to deal with claim as formulated - applicant has arguable case - serious question to be tried in context of proceedings - must be something of a definite nature that is indicative that dissipation of assets is a real possibility - respondents failed to honour a promise re availability of information re dissipation of assets - orders granted

LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996 s106

ACCC v Chaste Corporation Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 180 Brown v Rezitis (1970) 127 CLR 157 BWK Elders (Aust) Pty Ltd v Westgate Wool Co Pty Ltd (No 2) [2001] FCA 1844 Cardile v LED Builders Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 18 Hadid v Lenfest Communications Inc (1996) FCR 446 CASES CITED: Jackson v Sterling Industries (1987) 162 CLR 612 National Australia Bank Ltd v Bond Brewing Holdings Ltd (1990)169 CLR 271 Patrick Stevedores v Maritime Union of Australia (1998) 195 CLR 1 Patterson v BTR Engineering (Aust) Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 319 Perth Mint v Mickelberg (No 2) [1985] WAR 117 Sydney City Council v Zegarac (1998) 43 NSWLR 195 Todd v Novotny and anor [2001] WASC 171