FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Asden Developments Pty Ltd (in liq) v Dinoris (No 4) [2016] FCA 1001
File number: | QUD 578 of 2014 |
Judge: | REEVES J |
Date of judgment: | |
Date of last submissions: | 11 August 2016 |
Registry: | Queensland |
Division: | General Division |
National Practice Area: | Commercial and Corporations |
Sub-area: | Corporations and Corporate Insolvency |
Category: | No Catchwords |
Number of paragraphs: | |
Solicitor for the Applicant: | Mills Oakley Lawyers |
Counsel for the Respondents: | Mr I Erskine |
Solicitor for the Respondents: | HBM Lawyers |
ORDERS
ASDEN DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 115 851 833 Applicant | ||
AND: | First Respondent NICK COMBIS Second Respondent | |
DATE OF ORDER: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The originating application filed on 5 November 2014 is dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the first and second respondents’ costs of this proceeding, including reserved costs.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REEVES J:
1 The primary object of any litigant when commencing proceedings in a court of law is to obtain relief. In this case Asden Developments Pty Ltd (in liquidation) sought two forms of relief: a declaration under s 1317E(1)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and an order for compensation under s 1317H.
2 It has conceded that, in the circumstances, s 1317E(4) prevents it from seeking the former and it has failed to establish its case for the latter.
3 Along the way it has had a measure of success on one component of its breach of duty claim, namely that Mr Dinoris breached his duty under s 180 by failing to make enquiries of Ms Nichols about the transfer of the funds. However, it failed on all other aspects, including the other component of its breach of duty claim.
4 In all the circumstances, I do not therefore consider that the success it has had justifies a departure from the usual rule that costs should follow the event.
5 Accordingly, I order that Asden Developments Pty Ltd (in liquidation) pay Mr Dinoris and Mr Combis’ costs of this proceeding.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Reeves. |
