Intagro v ANZ Banking Group [2004] NSWSC 618

Reported Decision : 50 ACSR 224 (2004) 22 ACLC 1065

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Intagro v ANZ Banking Group [2004] NSWSC 618 HEARING DATE(S) : 9 July 2004 JUDGMENT DATE : 29 July 2004

JUDGMENT OF : McDougall J at 1 DECISION : See paras [86] and [87] of judgment

CATCHWORDS : PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - where leave to amend cross-claim sought - where amendment to cross-claim seeks to join cross-defendants - whether amendment raises claim that is obviously futile - whether amendment raises claim that is premature - whether amendment should not be permitted on discretionary grounds - where risk of relitigation - CORPORATIONS LAW - construction of s 197(1) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - whether majority view in Hanel v O'Neill (2003) 48 ACSR 378 plainly wrong - s 233 Corporations Law - statutory interpretation - whether legislature intended s197(1) to re-enact in substance, and with same effect, s 233(2) of Law - whether legislature intended s 197(1) to replace s 233(2) with provision of opposite effect - whether legislative intention that s 197(1) achieve some other purpose - meaning of "entitled" in s 197(1), (2) of Act. LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Corporations Law Hanel & Anor v O'Neill (2003) 48 ACSR 378 Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Limited (1993) 177 CLR 485 Little v Registrar of the High Court of Australia (1991) 29 FCR 544 Sterling Engineering Co Ltd v Patchett [1955] AC 534 Hill v Hasler [1921] 3 KB 643 Burswood Management Limited v Attorney-General (Cth) (1990) 23 FCR 144 CASES CITED : Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 The State of Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Limited (1997) 189 CLR 146 The Commonwealth of Australia v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394 Horton v Jones (No 2) (1939) 39 SR (NSW) 305 Octavo Investments Proprietary Limited v Knight (1979) 144 CLR 360 Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v British Bank for Foreign Trade Limited [1921] 2 AC 438 Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Limited (1972) 127 CLR 421 Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564 PARTIES : Intagro Projects Pty Ltd (Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant) Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (Defendant/Cross Claimant) FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 50165/03 COUNSEL : D J Hammerschlag SC/LV Gyles (Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant) S D Rares SC/P J Dowdy (Defendant/Cross-Claimant) SOLICITORS : Holding Redlich (Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant) Minter Ellison (Defendant/Cross-Claimant)