Cultus Petroleum v OMV Australia [1999] NSWSC 422

Reported Decision : [1999] 32 ACSR 1 [1999] 17 ACLC 935

New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Cultus Petroleum v OMV Australia [1999] NSWSC 422 CURRENT JURISDICTION : Equity FILE NUMBER(S) : 2179/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 03/05/1999; 04/05/1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 5 May 1999

PARTIES : Cultus Petroleum NL (ACN 009 102 505) (P) OMV Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 082 932 927) (D) JUDGMENT OF : Santow J

COUNSEL : J D Heydon, QC; R J Powell (P) P L G Brereton, SC; M A Robinson (D) SOLICITORS : Allen Allen & Hemsley (P) Freehill Hollingdale & Page (D) CATCHWORDS : CORPORATIONS — Companies — Takeover offers — Stock Exchange — Disclosure of material information under s750 cl 17 of Corporations Law — Injunctions — what is material for Part A Statement — Difference between speculation and prediction — Distinction between what may be included and what must be included — Context of offer being share bid versus cash bid — Necessity for substantiation of predictions to avoid being potentially misleading — Availability of additional information for this purpose in target company not bidder — Effect of any confidentiality attaching to information— relevant exception where "required to be disclosed under applicable law" — Exception applicable to information required to be disclosed as a result of action taken by the receiver of the information by making a bid — Recipient of information at time of Part A not aware that the provider of the information arguably constrained by joint venture agreement — Paramountcy of s750 cl 17 over any equitable obligation of confidentiality — Effect of ASX listing requirement 3.1 requiring continuous disclosure and scope of exception — Meaning of "incomplete proposal" — Agreement to accept bid — no contravention of s697 of Corporations Law though free to cancel pre-trial acceptance — Meaning of benefit; EQUITY — Equitable remedies — Injunctions in takeovers — Discretionary considerations — Lack of prompt action — Effect on shareholders being deprived of offer; WORDS AND PHRASES — "required to be disclosed under applicable law", "benefit" ASX Listing Requirements 3.1 Corporations Law s9 s51 ACTS CITED : s637 s697 s698 s743 s750 Aberfoyle Ltd v Western Metals Ltd (1998) 28 ACSR 187 Augold NL v Yaramin Pty Ltd (1987) 5 ACLC 295 Austen & Butta Ltd v Shell Australia Ltd & Anor (1992) 10 ACLC 735 Austen & Butta Ltd v Shell Australia Ltd (1992-93) 10 ACSR 556 Australian Consolidated Investments Ltd v Rossington Holdings Pty Ltd (1992) 35 FCR 226 Basic Inc v Levinson (1987) 485 US 224 Boral Energy Resources Ltd v TU Australia (Queensland) Ltd (1998) 28 ACSR 1 Cackett v Keswick [1902] 2 Ch 456 Carr Boyd Minerals Ltd v Queen Margaret Gold Mines NL (1987) 7 ACLC 1029 GIO Australia Holdings Ltd v AMP Insurance Investment Holdings Pty Ltd (1998) 29 ACSR 584 Malone v Commissioner of Police [1979] 2 All ER 620 Pancontinental Mining Ltd v Goldfields Ltd (1995) 16 ACSR 463 Primac Holdings Ltd v IAMA Ltd (1996) 22 ACSR 454 Primac Holdings Ltd v ASC (1997) 15 ACLC 218 24 AAR 157 Queensland Coal Pty Ltd v Arco Resources Limited & Ors [1998] QSC 222 (20 October 1998) RACV Investment Co Pty Ltd v Silbury Pty Ltd (1986) 13 ACLR 555 CASES CITED : Re Cumberland Holdings Ltd (1976) 1 ACLR 361 CLC 28 515 Re Evans Deakin Industries Ltd (1980) 5 ACLR 322 at 324 (1981) CLC 33 151 Re Rossfield Group Operations Pty Ltd [1981] Qd R 372 (1980) 5 ACLR 237 CLC 40-710 Sagasco Amadeus Pty Ltd v Magellan Petroleum Australia Ltd (1993) 177 CLR 10 ACSR 398 Savage Resources Ltd v Pasminco Investments Pty Ltd (1998) 159 ALR 304 Solomon Pacific Resources NL v Acacia Resources Ltd (No. 1) (1996) 19 ACSR 238 TSC Industries Inc v Northway Inc (1976) 426 US 438 Wesfi Ltd v Blend Investments Pty Limited (SCWA Wheeler J 16 April 1999 unreported) DECISION : Injunction to restrain dispatch of Part A refused