Gap Constructions Pty Ltd v Vigar Pty Limited [2011] NSWSC 948

Gap Constructions Pty Ltd v Vigar Pty Limited [2011] NSWSC 948

Both plaintiffs were found to have had sufficient knowledge of the court’s orders and, despite being specifically informed of deficiencies, wilfully failed to provide the required information in their affidavits, constituting contempt of court proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Gap Constructions Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Peter Bega; First Defendant: Vigar Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Bega Group Pty Ltd; Third Defendant: Con Bosganas; Fourth Defendant: Bugong Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion (contempt) / Decision on Liability for Contempt; Sentencing to Be Determined
Outcome
Contempt found proved against the first and second plaintiffs; sentencing stands adjourned.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freezing Orders, Disclosure Orders, Wilful Disobedience
Equity Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Disclosure Orders Wilful Disobedience

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gap Constructions Pty Ltd

First Plaintiff

Peter Bega

Second Plaintiff

Vigar Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Bega Group Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Con Bosganas

Third Defendant

Bugong Pty Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion (contempt) / Decision on Liability for Contempt; Sentencing to Be Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs failed to comply with court orders requiring affidavits disclosing information about financial transactions
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs' failure was wilful and constituted contempt of court

Ratio Decidendi

Both plaintiffs were found to have had sufficient knowledge of the court’s orders and, despite being specifically informed of deficiencies, wilfully failed to provide the required information in their affidavits, constituting contempt of court proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Contempt found proved against the first and second plaintiffs; sentencing stands adjourned.

Orders

  • The first and second plaintiffs are found in contempt.
  • The Court fixes Thursday 8 September 2011 at 3.00pm as the date for submissions on sentence.