IMMIGRATION - Visas - Where plaintiff applied for protection (subclass 866) visa - Where document in application for visa included English text and images with Mandarin characters - Where Minister's delegate requested further information under s 56 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - Where plaintiff did not provide translation of document relied on - Where delegate refused application for protection visa - Where delegate stated documents not translated not included as part of assessment - Whether delegate failed to comply with ss 54 and 56 of Migration Act - Whether delegate's decision legally unreasonable - Whether necessary in interests of administration of justice to grant extension of time to make application for constitutional or other writ.
IMMIGRATION - Visas - Where plaintiff applied for protection (subclass 866) visa - Where document in application for visa included English text and images with Mandarin characters - Where Minister's delegate requested further information under s 56 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - Where plaintiff did not provide translation of document relied on - Where delegate refused application for protection visa - Where delegate stated documents not translated not included as part of assessment - Whether delegate failed to comply with ss 54 and 56 of Migration Act - Whether delegate's decision legally unreasonable - Whether necessary in interests of administration of justice to grant extension of time to make application for constitutional or other writ.
WORDS AND PHRASES - "certiorari", "constitutional or other writ", "extension of time", "have regard to all of the information", "invitation for additional information", "jurisdictional error", "mandamus", "materiality", "must have regard to that information", "necessary in the interests of the administration of justice", "protection obligations", "protection visa", "realistic possibility", "specify all particulars of his or her claim", "unreasonableness".
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5AAA, 54, 56, 58, 62, 65, 476, 476A, 476B, 486A.
High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), rr 4.02, 25.02.1, 25.02.2, 25.09.3.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Implied freedom of communication about government or political matters - Where s 501(6)(d)(iv) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) provides that person does not pass character test if risk they would, if allowed to enter Australia, "incite discord in the Australian community or in a segment of that community" - Where Minister for Home Affairs ("Minister") refused visa to controversial political commentator on basis of s 501(6)(d)(iv) - Whether there need be risk of harm to Australian community or segment of that community in order to satisfy s 501(6)(d)(iv) - Whether s 501(6)(d)(iv) invalid for infringing implied freedom of communication about government or political matters - Whether Minister misconstrued s 501(6)(d)(iv) in decision to refuse visa.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Implied freedom of communication about government or political matters - Where s 501(6)(d)(iv) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) provides that person does not pass character test if risk they would, if allowed to enter Australia, "incite discord in the Australian community or in a segment of that community" - Where Minister for Home Affairs ("Minister") refused visa to controversial political commentator on basis of s 501(6)(d)(iv) - Whether there need be risk of harm to Australian community or segment of that community in order to satisfy s 501(6)(d)(iv) - Whether s 501(6)(d)(iv) invalid for infringing implied freedom of communication about government or political matters - Whether Minister misconstrued s 501(6)(d)(iv) in decision to refuse visa.
WORDS AND PHRASES - "aliens power", "character test", "controversial views", "danger", "definitional", "discord", "dissension or strife", "effectively burdens", "extremist views", "free flow of political communication", "harm", "implicature", "implied freedom of political communication", "in the Australian community or a segment of that community", "incite discord", "national interest", "no liberty to enter", "non-citizens", "personal right", "political communication", "practical burden", "right-wing extremism", "visa".
Constitution, ss 7, 24, 51(xix), (xxvii).
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 501(3), 501(6)(d)(iv), 501(6)(d)(v).
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Legislative power - Inconsistency between Commonwealth and State laws - External affairs - Acquisition of property on just terms - Where rate of land tax imposed by State law on non-residents and foreign-owned or controlled entities higher than rate of land tax imposed on other residents and entities - Where Commonwealth law gave force of law to international agreements prohibiting discriminatory land tax on non-residents and foreign-owned or controlled entities - Where Commonwealth Parliament subsequently passed law excluding State taxes from scope of prohibition in Commonwealth law on imposition of discriminatory land tax on non-residents and foreign-owned or controlled entities - Whether State law inconsistent with Commonwealth law for purposes of s 109 of Constitution - Whether subsequent Commonwealth law supported by external affairs power - Whether subsequent Commonwealth law had retroactive or retrospective effect - Whether subsequent Commonwealth law effective in removing retroactively inconsistency between Commonwealth law and State law - Whether University of Wollongong v Metwally (1984) 158 CLR 447 should be reopened and overruled - Whether Commonwealth law reviving operation of State law imposing "genuine taxation" characterised as a law with respect to acquisition of property.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Legislative power - Inconsistency between Commonwealth and State laws - External affairs - Acquisition of property on just terms - Where rate of land tax imposed by State law on non-residents and foreign-owned or controlled entities higher than rate of land tax imposed on other residents and entities - Where Commonwealth law gave force of law to international agreements prohibiting discriminatory land tax on non-residents and foreign-owned or controlled entities - Where Commonwealth Parliament subsequently passed law excluding State taxes from scope of prohibition in Commonwealth law on imposition of discriminatory land tax on non-residents and foreign-owned or controlled entities - Whether State law inconsistent with Commonwealth law for purposes of s 109 of Constitution - Whether subsequent Commonwealth law supported by external affairs power - Whether subsequent Commonwealth law had retroactive or retrospective effect - Whether subsequent Commonwealth law effective in removing retroactively inconsistency between Commonwealth law and State law - Whether University of Wollongong v Metwally (1984) 158 CLR 447 should be reopened and overruled - Whether Commonwealth law reviving operation of State law imposing "genuine taxation" characterised as a law with respect to acquisition of property.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Judicial power of Commonwealth - Admissibility of evidence - Where information and records obtained pursuant to warrants - Where Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Act 2024 (Cth) ("Confirmation of Application Act") deems information and records obtained under specified warrants to have been lawfully obtained - Whether Confirmation of Application Act invalid - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissible exercise by Parliament of judicial power of Commonwealth - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissibly interferes with and undermines institutional integrity of courts vested with federal jurisdiction.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Cth) - Judicial power of Commonwealth - Admissibility of evidence - Where information and records obtained pursuant to warrants - Where Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Act 2024 (Cth) ("Confirmation of Application Act") deems information and records obtained under specified warrants to have been lawfully obtained - Whether Confirmation of Application Act invalid - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissible exercise by Parliament of judicial power of Commonwealth - Whether Confirmation of Application Act impermissibly interferes with and undermines institutional integrity of courts vested with federal jurisdiction.
WORDS AND PHRASES - "admissible", "communication", "criminal proceedings", "evidence", "exercise of judicial power", "illegally obtained", "inadmissible", "intercepting a communication", "interfere with the integrity of courts", "judicial power", "legislative power", "statutory concept", "telecommunications system", "undue impairment of judicial power", "unlawfully intercepted", "usurpation of judicial power", "warrant".
Constitution, Ch III.
Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Act 2024 (Cth), ss 4, 5, 6. 7.
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth), ss 7, 63, 77.
Appeal from Commissioner's determination disallowing appellant's objection against an assessment for landholder duty under Part 2 of Chapter 3 of Duties Act 2000 - Where appeal dismissed - Where parties are not agreed as to final orders including as to costs - Where the Commissioner, by leave, advanced new or re-vamped basis to support the assessment on appeal - Where the Commissioner acknowledged that there were 'inaccuracies' in the assessment as made but on appeal was seeking to recover duty in the same amount but on the re-vamped basis contended for (i.e. reflecting 'what the Commissioner in effect did') - Where Court has determined it is appropriate to remit the assessment to the Commissioner to give effect to the Court's reasons - Where appellant has been put to significant trouble and expense as a result of the Commissioner's late change of position on appeal - Appellant ordered to pay 75% of the Commissioner's costs on the standard basis - Final orders made - Taxation Administration Act 1997 (Vic) ss 109, 112, 114; Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24; Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) s 65C.
Appeal from Commissioner's determination disallowing appellant's objection against an assessment for landholder duty under Part 2 of Chapter 3 of Duties Act 2000 - Where appeal dismissed - Where parties are not agreed as to final orders including as to costs - Where the Commissioner, by leave, advanced new or re-vamped basis to support the assessment on appeal - Where the Commissioner acknowledged that there were 'inaccuracies' in the assessment as made but on appeal was seeking to recover duty in the same amount but on the re-vamped basis contended for (i.e. reflecting 'what the Commissioner in effect did') - Where Court has determined it is appropriate to remit the assessment to the Commissioner to give effect to the Court's reasons - Where appellant has been put to significant trouble and expense as a result of the Commissioner's late change of position on appeal - Appellant ordered to pay 75% of the Commissioner's costs on the standard basis - Final orders made - Taxation Administration Act 1997 (Vic) ss 109, 112, 114; Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 24; Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) s 65C.
INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION - Urgent ex parte application - Where in advance of his departure, former employee of a security services business has downloaded information including client data - Where former employee has recently established a rival security services business and has been contacting plaintiff's clients seeking their business - Where injunction sought to prevent continuing misuse of confidential information including client data - Prima facie case and serious question to be tried - Consideration as to whether a plaintiff claiming misuse of confidential information must demonstrate damages would not be an adequate remedy - Whether balance of convenience favours granting of an injunction - Where lower risk of injustice if interim relief sought is granted - Usual undertakings as to damages given by the plaintiff - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 37 - Court satisfied that it is just and convenient to grant the injunctive relief sought on an interim basis.
INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION - Urgent ex parte application - Where in advance of his departure, former employee of a security services business has downloaded information including client data - Where former employee has recently established a rival security services business and has been contacting plaintiff's clients seeking their business - Where injunction sought to prevent continuing misuse of confidential information including client data - Prima facie case and serious question to be tried - Consideration as to whether a plaintiff claiming misuse of confidential information must demonstrate damages would not be an adequate remedy - Whether balance of convenience favours granting of an injunction - Where lower risk of injustice if interim relief sought is granted - Usual undertakings as to damages given by the plaintiff - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 37 - Court satisfied that it is just and convenient to grant the injunctive relief sought on an interim basis.
TRUSTS - Application by the unitholders to inspect the documents relating to legal advice obtained by the trustee of the trust - Whether 'proprietary approach' or 'discretionary approach' should be applied - Whether joint privilege applies in the legal-professional privilege - Whether the beneficiaries should not have a right of access to the relevant documents where the legal advice and services were provided during and for the purposes of a dispute between a trustee and a related entity of the beneficiaries - Deutsch v Trumble (2016) 52 VR 108; [2016] VSC 263 applied - Orders made for production and inspection.
TRUSTS - Application by the unitholders to inspect the documents relating to legal advice obtained by the trustee of the trust - Whether 'proprietary approach' or 'discretionary approach' should be applied - Whether joint privilege applies in the legal-professional privilege - Whether the beneficiaries should not have a right of access to the relevant documents where the legal advice and services were provided during and for the purposes of a dispute between a trustee and a related entity of the beneficiaries - Deutsch v Trumble (2016) 52 VR 108; [2016] VSC 263 applied - Orders made for production and inspection.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Group proceeding - Application for approval of settlement - Whether confidentiality orders should be made - Whether settlement distribution scheme is fair and reasonable - Settlement distribution between classes of group members - Deductions from the settlement fund - Whether group costs order should be varied - No variation to group costs order - Settlement approved - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) Part 4A, s 33V, s 33ZDA.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Group proceeding - Application for approval of settlement - Whether confidentiality orders should be made - Whether settlement distribution scheme is fair and reasonable - Settlement distribution between classes of group members - Deductions from the settlement fund - Whether group costs order should be varied - No variation to group costs order - Settlement approved - Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) Part 4A, s 33V, s 33ZDA.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Security for costs - Quantum of security - Weight to be attributed to expert evidence and evidence from the parties' solicitors as to quantum - Impact of potential duplication of work between legal practitioners - Whether quantum should be reduced due to the costs associated with the counterclaim - Whether a further discount is appropriate to account for the risk that specified costs are not incurred - Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015, r 62.02 - Trailer Trash Franchise Systems Pty Ltd v Go Markets Fascia & Cutter Pty Ltd [2017] VSCA 293 - Grace Christian Chapel v Canaan Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] VSC 5 - Jabiru Satellite Ltd (in liq) (recs and mgrs apptd) v Societe Generale [2022] VSC 521 - Norcast S.ár.L v Bradken Ltd [2012] FCA 765.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Security for costs - Quantum of security - Weight to be attributed to expert evidence and evidence from the parties' solicitors as to quantum - Impact of potential duplication of work between legal practitioners - Whether quantum should be reduced due to the costs associated with the counterclaim - Whether a further discount is appropriate to account for the risk that specified costs are not incurred - Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015, r 62.02 - Trailer Trash Franchise Systems Pty Ltd v Go Markets Fascia & Cutter Pty Ltd [2017] VSCA 293 - Grace Christian Chapel v Canaan Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] VSC 5 - Jabiru Satellite Ltd (in liq) (recs and mgrs apptd) v Societe Generale [2022] VSC 521 - Norcast S.ár.L v Bradken Ltd [2012] FCA 765.
PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW - Stay application - General principles - Fragmentation of litigation - Forum non conveniens - Supreme Court of Victoria not an inappropriate forum - Foreign law - Presumption that foreign law is the same as the law of the forum - Displacing the presumption - Clearly inappropriate forum test - No obligation on plaintiff to allege foreign law - Regie Nationale Des Usines Renault SA v Zhang (2002) 210 CLR 491; Palmer v Turnbull [2019] 1 Qd R 286; Damberg v Damberg (2001) 52 NSWLR 492; Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd (2005) 223 CLR 331; Benson v Rational Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (2018) 97 NSWLR 798; Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Shi (2021) 273 CLR 235.
PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW - Stay application - General principles - Fragmentation of litigation - Forum non conveniens - Supreme Court of Victoria not an inappropriate forum - Foreign law - Presumption that foreign law is the same as the law of the forum - Displacing the presumption - Clearly inappropriate forum test - No obligation on plaintiff to allege foreign law - Regie Nationale Des Usines Renault SA v Zhang (2002) 210 CLR 491; Palmer v Turnbull [2019] 1 Qd R 286; Damberg v Damberg (2001) 52 NSWLR 492; Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd (2005) 223 CLR 331; Benson v Rational Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (2018) 97 NSWLR 798; Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Shi (2021) 273 CLR 235.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Service of originating process - Whether basis for service out of Australia under r 7.02 - Whether basis for service out of Australia under r 7.02(h)(i) - Failure to serve a notice pursuant to r 7.05 - Failure to serve a person out of Australia with a notice in Form 7AAA - Whether second defendant a necessary or proper party within the meaning of r 7.02(h)(i) - Meaning of proper party - Meaning of proper party under r 7.02(h)(i) - Rules 9.02 and 9.06(b) - Permissive joinder of parties under r 9.02 and r 7.02(h)(i) - Maclaine Watson & Co Private Ltd v Bing Chen [1983] 1 NSWLR 163 - Beamer Pty Ltd v Star Lodge Supported Residential Services Pty Ltd (No 1) [2004] VSC 390 - Colosseum Investment Holdings Pty Ltd and Anor v Vanguard Logistics Services Pty Ltd and Ors [2005] NSWSC 803 - Sapphire Group Pty Ltd v Luxotico HK Ltd [2021] NSWSC 589 - Horizon Capital Fund v Insurance Australia Ltd; Horizon Capital Fund v Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co. Ltd [2023] NSWSC 389; Harpur v Levy [2007] 16 VR 587; Madden International Ltd v Lew Footwear Holdings Pty Ltd [2015] VSCA 90; (2015) 50 VR 22; Schib Packaging Srl v Emrich Industries Pty Ltd [2005] VSCA 236; (2005) 12 VR 268; Chickabo Pty Ltd & Ors v Zphere Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2019] VSC 580.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for originating process to be set aside pursuant to r 7.04 - Whether Supreme Court of Victoria an inappropriate forum - Forum non conveniens general principles - Meaning of 'inappropriate forum' in r 7.04(2)(b) - Whether 'inappropriate forum' means 'clearly inappropriate forum' - Whether claim against overseas defendant has insufficient prospects of success to warrant putting the defendant served out of Australia to the time, expense and trouble of defending the claim - Rule 7.04(2)(c) - Applicable test for determining whether a claim has 'insufficient prospects of success' within the meaning of r 7.04(2)(c) -Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd (1990) 171 CLR 538; Regie Nationale Des Usines Renault SA v Zhang (2002) 210 CLR 491; Republica Democratica de Timor Leste v Lighthouse Corp Ltd [2019] VSCA 290; Incitec Ltd v Alkimos Shipping Corporation & Anor (2004) 138 FCR 496; Agar v Hyde (2000) 201 CLR 552; Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick (2002) 210 CLR 575; Rowe v Grunenthal GmbH [2011] VSC 657; Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Limited v Quine (2018) 55 VR 701; Azzi v Fox Fire Security System L.L.C. [2020] NSWSC 331; Shenzhen Xinhe Hongshi Investment and Consultancy Co Ltd v Shandong Ruyi Technology Group Co Ltd [2025] FCA 860.
CONTRACT - Breach of contract - General principles for the tort of inducing breach of contract.
FREEZING ORDERS - Post-judgment application - Whether risk of dissipation of assets established - Relevance of existing undertakings to the Court - Relevance of financial agreement entered into between defendant and wife pursuant to s 90C of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - Whether agreement intended to defeat creditors - Allegations of sham separation - No evidence of dishonesty sufficient to support freezing order - Mere insolvency not determinative - Sufficiency of undertakings to safeguard property assets - Freezing order a drastic remedy - Applicable principles - Discretionary factors - Application dismissed - Zhen v Mo [2008] VSC 300 - Rozenblit v Vainer [2019] VSCA 164 - Patterson v BTR Engineering (Aust) Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 319.
FREEZING ORDERS - Post-judgment application - Whether risk of dissipation of assets established - Relevance of existing undertakings to the Court - Relevance of financial agreement entered into between defendant and wife pursuant to s 90C of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - Whether agreement intended to defeat creditors - Allegations of sham separation - No evidence of dishonesty sufficient to support freezing order - Mere insolvency not determinative - Sufficiency of undertakings to safeguard property assets - Freezing order a drastic remedy - Applicable principles - Discretionary factors - Application dismissed - Zhen v Mo [2008] VSC 300 - Rozenblit v Vainer [2019] VSCA 164 - Patterson v BTR Engineering (Aust) Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 319.
INJUNCTIONS - Application for interlocutory injunction - Where plaintiff seeks to restrain first and second defendants from putting a resolution to a company board concerning payment of moneys - Principles relevant to granting interlocutory injunctions - No serious questions to be tried - Balance of convenience weighs against granting of interlocutory injunction - Damages likely an adequate remedy - Application dismissed.
INJUNCTIONS - Application for interlocutory injunction - Where plaintiff seeks to restrain first and second defendants from putting a resolution to a company board concerning payment of moneys - Principles relevant to granting interlocutory injunctions - No serious questions to be tried - Balance of convenience weighs against granting of interlocutory injunction - Damages likely an adequate remedy - Application dismissed.
CORPORATIONS - Liquidation of trustee company - Company operated in capacity as trustee - Liquidator's application for appointment as receiver of trust assets, relief under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1318 and remuneration from trust assets - Relief granted - Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) s 90-15 - Re Cremin (in his capacity as liquidator of Brimson Pty Ltd (in liq) [2019] FCA 1023 - Re Amerind Pty Ltd (receivers and managers apptd) (in liq) (2017) 320 FLR 118 - Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (2019) 268 CLR 524.
CORPORATIONS - Liquidation of trustee company - Company operated in capacity as trustee - Liquidator's application for appointment as receiver of trust assets, relief under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 1318 and remuneration from trust assets - Relief granted - Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) s 90-15 - Re Cremin (in his capacity as liquidator of Brimson Pty Ltd (in liq) [2019] FCA 1023 - Re Amerind Pty Ltd (receivers and managers apptd) (in liq) (2017) 320 FLR 118 - Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (2019) 268 CLR 524.
CORPORATIONS - Company that carried on business as trustee of a trading trust - Trustee company now in liquidation - Company removed as trustee by reason of 'ipso facto' clause in trust deed - Application by liquidator for an order pursuant to s 63 of the Trustee Act 1958 (Vic) - Application for relief from liability pursuant to s 1318 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) -* Caterpillar Financial Australia Ltd v Ovens Nominees Pty Ltd* [2011] FCA 677 - Jones v Matrix Partners Pty Ltd; Re Killarnee Silver & Concrete Contractors Pty Ltd (in liq) (2018) 260 FCR 310 - Cremin, in re Brimson Pty Ltd (in liq) (2019) 136 ACSR 649 - Pitard Consortium Pty Ltd atf the Pitard Trust v Les Denny Pty Ltd (2019) 58 VR 524 - In the matter of Urban Property Pty Ltd [2021] VSC 847.
CORPORATIONS - Company that carried on business as trustee of a trading trust - Trustee company now in liquidation - Company removed as trustee by reason of 'ipso facto' clause in trust deed - Application by liquidator for an order pursuant to s 63 of the Trustee Act 1958 (Vic) - Application for relief from liability pursuant to s 1318 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) -* Caterpillar Financial Australia Ltd v Ovens Nominees Pty Ltd* [2011] FCA 677 - Jones v Matrix Partners Pty Ltd; Re Killarnee Silver & Concrete Contractors Pty Ltd (in liq) (2018) 260 FCR 310 - Cremin, in re Brimson Pty Ltd (in liq) (2019) 136 ACSR 649 - Pitard Consortium Pty Ltd atf the Pitard Trust v Les Denny Pty Ltd (2019) 58 VR 524 - In the matter of Urban Property Pty Ltd [2021] VSC 847.
CORPORATIONS - Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - s 461(1)(k) - Winding up on just and equitable ground - Company established as Indigenous joint venture - Failure of main object of company - Irretrievable breakdown in relationship of trust and confidence between shareholders - Lack of confidence in conduct and management of affairs of company - Deadlock - Dysfunction of board of directors - Financial position of company - Where company reliant on ongoing financial assistance from minority shareholder and applicant for winding up - s 467(4) - Whether other remedy available - Relative justice of winding up remedy.
CORPORATIONS - Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - s 461(1)(k) - Winding up on just and equitable ground - Company established as Indigenous joint venture - Failure of main object of company - Irretrievable breakdown in relationship of trust and confidence between shareholders - Lack of confidence in conduct and management of affairs of company - Deadlock - Dysfunction of board of directors - Financial position of company - Where company reliant on ongoing financial assistance from minority shareholder and applicant for winding up - s 467(4) - Whether other remedy available - Relative justice of winding up remedy.
CORPORATIONS - Liquidation of trustee company - Company operated exclusively in its capacity as trustee - Whether liquidator justified and acting reasonably in so concluding - Whether to appoint liquidator as receiver and manager pursuant to s 37(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) or make orders pursuant to s 63 of Trustee Act 1958 (Vic) - Liquidator appointed as receiver and manager - Re Waratah Group Pty Ltd (in liq) [2020] VSC 523, applied; Re Amerind Pty Ltd (receivers and managers apptd) (in liq) (2017) 320 FLR 118, applied.
CORPORATIONS - Liquidation of trustee company - Company operated exclusively in its capacity as trustee - Whether liquidator justified and acting reasonably in so concluding - Whether to appoint liquidator as receiver and manager pursuant to s 37(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) or make orders pursuant to s 63 of Trustee Act 1958 (Vic) - Liquidator appointed as receiver and manager - Re Waratah Group Pty Ltd (in liq) [2020] VSC 523, applied; Re Amerind Pty Ltd (receivers and managers apptd) (in liq) (2017) 320 FLR 118, applied.
White Proceeding: Limitation period - Whether irremediable harm caused by failure to plead limitation defence - Whether leave should be granted to amend defence - Whether extension of time can be granted.
White Proceeding: Limitation period - Whether irremediable harm caused by failure to plead limitation defence - Whether leave should be granted to amend defence - Whether extension of time can be granted.
Whether plaintiff identified - Extrinsic facts - Whether all imputations conveyed attach to plaintiff - Whether imputations conveyed are true - Qualified privilege reply to attack.
Dalas Proceeding: Serious harm - Whether plaintiff can rely on multiple publications of same defamatory matter to establish serious harm - Whether serious harm needs to be established for each imputation - Whether imputations were expression of honest opinion - Qualified privilege reply to attack - Where defendant was attacker - Assessment of damages - Aggravated damages where defendant relied on truth defence after receiving information that the allegation was not true - Where defendant motivated by malice - Injunction where defendant has demonstrated unwillingness to comply with terms of intervention order - Where defendant has published over seventy posts about plaintiff.
CRIMINAL LAW - Extradition - Murder - s 83 and s 88 Service and Execution of Process Act 1992 (Cth) - s 13 Bail Act 1977 (Vic) - Jurisdiction of the Magistrates' Court of Victoria.
CRIMINAL LAW - Extradition - Murder - s 83 and s 88 Service and Execution of Process Act 1992 (Cth) - s 13 Bail Act 1977 (Vic) - Jurisdiction of the Magistrates' Court of Victoria.