Pisano v Dandris [2015] NSWSC 1219

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Pisano v Dandris [2015] NSWSC 1219 Hearing dates: 21 August 2015 Decision date: 21 August 2015 Jurisdiction: Equity - Technology and Construction List Before: McDougall J Decision: Respondent has no case to answer in respect of 20 of 22 particulars of alleged contempt. Catchwords: CONTEMPT – defendant charged with failing to comply with freezing orders – application under r 29.10 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) – whether, on the evidence given, a judgment could be supported – whether the contempt properly classified as criminal or civil – whether standard of proof is criminal or civil – two grounds advanced by defendant for entering judgment in its favour – first ground – evidence of transactions does not demonstrate that they did not fall within exception for authorised spending – where that is a matter for the defendant, not the plaintiff, to demonstrate – second ground – all but two transactions occurred at a time that the orders were not in force – orders subsequently amended retrospectively 'nunc pro tunc' – defendant cannot be deemed to be in breach of orders that were not in force at time of alleged infringing acts – result that second ground is made out, in respect of the transactions to which it relates – consequence that defendant has no case to answer except in relation to two transactions Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: ASIC v Sigalla (No 3) [2010] NSWSC 1076 Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Hearne v Street (2008) 235 CLR 125 Pang v Bydand Holdings Pty Limited [2011] NSWCA 69 Street v Hearne (2007) 70 NSWLR 231 Witham v Holloway (1995) 183 CLR 525 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Bruno Pisano (First Plaintiff) Sia Pisano (Second Plaintiff) Georgia Dandris (First Defendant) Patrick Francis Williams (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: DS Weinberger / AF Knox (Plaintiffs) J Jobson (First Defendant)