Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 13) [2011] FCA 1209

Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd v Prudentia Investments Pty Ltd (No 13) [2011] FCA 1209

While there are compelling reasons to attempt an expedited trial in November 2011, existing appellate commitments preclude the docket judge from conducting the trial at that time. Unless an alternative judge is available, the case proceeds to existing trial dates in March 2012.

Parties
First Applicant: SUNLAND WATERFRONT (BVI) LTD; Second Applicant: SUNLAND GROUP PTY LTD ACN 063 429 532; First Respondent: PRUDENTIA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 091 390 742; Second Respondent: HANLEY INVESTMENTS PTE LTD; Third Respondent: ANGUS JOHN LUXMOORE REED; Fourth Respondent: MATTHEW JAMES JOYCE
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Application / Application for Expedited Hearing of Trial
Outcome
Application for expedited trial noted; request to Chief Justice for alternate judge; failing that, trial remains set for March 2012; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Expedited Trial, Listing of Cases, Balancing Parties’ Interests, Change of Counsel
Practice and Procedure Expedited Trial Listing of Cases Balancing Parties’ Interests Change of Counsel

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SUNLAND WATERFRONT (BVI) LTD

First Applicant

SUNLAND GROUP PTY LTD ACN 063 429 532

Second Applicant

PRUDENTIA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 091 390 742

First Respondent

HANLEY INVESTMENTS PTE LTD

Second Respondent

ANGUS JOHN LUXMOORE REED

Third Respondent

MATTHEW JAMES JOYCE

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application / Application for Expedited Hearing of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial should be expedited to November 2011 given the risk to Mr Joyce and other parties’ interests
  2. 2 Whether to maintain the existing trial listing in March 2012

Ratio Decidendi

While there are compelling reasons to attempt an expedited trial in November 2011, existing appellate commitments preclude the docket judge from conducting the trial at that time. Unless an alternative judge is available, the case proceeds to existing trial dates in March 2012.

Court Disposition

Application for expedited trial noted; request to Chief Justice for alternate judge; failing that, trial remains set for March 2012; costs reserved.

Orders

  • If no communication from Registrar by close of business on 14 October 2011, parties to proceed on basis of March 2012 listing for trial dates.
  • Costs reserved.