NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Murakami v Wiryadi & Ors [2006] NSWSC 1354
HEARING DATE(S) : 24/11/06
JUDGMENT DATE : 7 December 2006
JUDGMENT OF : Gzell J
DECISION : Stay ordered upon undertakings to consent to the tender of documents obtained on subpoena and notice to produce in Indonesian court proceedings and to release the plaintiff from her implied undertaking not to use the documents for any purpose other than the proceedings.
CATCHWORDS : PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW - Stay of proceedings - Forum non conveniens - Indonesian parties to proceedings only one of whom resident - Allegations that properties in New South Wales and Australian bank accounts are common marital property under Indonesian law to be divided between spouses on divorce - Forced heirship rules that children of deceased entitled equally to his estate regardless of contents of will - Allegations of implied obligations based on uncodified Indonesian custom, the efficacy of Indonesian court business, the prospect of embezzlement and to permit the courts to act in accordance with the dictates of justice and Indonesian law - Allegations that first defendant sought to deceive the Indonesian courts by non-disclosure of the Australian assets in Indonesian proceedings to divide the common marital property - Whether connecting factors demonstrated that the local forum is clearly inappropriate as vexatious or oppressive
Civil Code (Indonesia) LEGISLATION CITED : Marriage Law of 1974 (Indonesia) Criminal Code (Indonesia) Civil Procedure Act 2005
McGregor v Potts & Ors [2005] NSWSC 1098 Oceanic Sun Line Special Shipping Company Inc v Fay (1987-1988) 165 CLR 197 Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd [1987] AC 460 Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd (1990) 171 CLR 538 Henry v Henry (1995-1996) 185 CLR 571 CSR Ltd v Cigna Insurance Australia Ltd (1996-1997) 189 CLR 345 Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia (1972) 20 FLR 30 British South Africa Co v Companhia de Moçambique [1893] AC 602 CASES CITED : Hesperides Hotels Ltd v Muftizade [1979] AC 508 Re Doyle (dec'd), ex parte Brien v Doyle (1993) 41 FCR 40 Puttick v Fletcher Challenge Forests Ltd [2006] VSC 370 Amwano v Parberry (2005) 148 FCR 126 El-Kharouf v El-Kharouf [2004] NSWSC 187 Official Receiver of State of Israel v Raveh [2001] WASC 289 Pacific Petroleum Corp v Nauru Phosphate Corp [2002] QSC 389 In the Marriage of Kemeny (1998) 145 FLR 6 Ivanovski & Anor v Perdacher [2006] NSWSC 978
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