NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (In Liq); Lamru Pty Ltd v Kation Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 271 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3081/97; 1750/02 HEARING DATE(S) : 26 & 27 March 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 5 April 2002
3081/97 Peter Lawrence Lewis (P) Lamru Pty Ltd (Applicant) Kation Pty Ltd (Respondent) PARTIES : Brian Raymond Silvia (Liquidator) 1750/02 Lamru Pty Limited (P) Kation Pty Limited (D1) Peter Lawrence Lewis (D2) Mark Lewis (D3) JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J
J T Johnson (Kation P/L & P L Lewis) COUNSEL : S J Motbey (Lamru P/L) P A Somerset, Solicitor (Liquidator) M Wilks, Solicitor, later M P Cleary (M Lewis) Kemp Strang (P L Lewis & Kation P/L) SOLICITORS : Lyons & Lyons (Lamru P/L) Abbott Tout (Liquidator) Corrs Chambers Westgarth (M Lewis) CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE [90] - Supreme Court procedure - Practice under Supreme Court Rules - Parties - Representative orders - Whether person should be appointed to represent trust where no current trustee but the only two beneficiaries are parties. LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 471B Supreme Court Rules 1970 Part 8 rr 13 & 14 CASES CITED : Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (in Liq); Lamru Pty Ltd v Kation Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 249 DECISION : No separate representative of the beneficiaries of the Nortex Unit Trust should be appointed or joined as a defendant in the proceedings.
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