Iconic Constructions Australia Pty Ltd v Tomaras [2023] NSWSC 1572

Iconic Constructions Australia Pty Ltd v Tomaras [2023] NSWSC 1572

The plaintiffs failed to prove to the requisite degree that there was a real danger of the second defendant disposing of assets within the jurisdiction so as to leave any judgment unsatisfied; the sale of one family home and purchase of another, in the circumstances explained by the evidence, did not establish asset dissipation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure — Interim Preservation — Application for Extension of Freezing Order / Urgent Interlocutory Application to Extend the Operation of a Freezing Order
Outcome
Application to extend the operation of the freezing order declined.
Legal Topics
['freezing Order' 'interim Preservation' 'asset Dissipation' 'extension of Interlocutory Order']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['freezing Order' 'interim Preservation' 'asset Dissipation' 'extension of Interlocutory Order']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure — Interim Preservation — Application for Extension of Freezing Order / Urgent Interlocutory Application to Extend the Operation of a Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the freezing order against the second defendant should be extended beyond 5pm on 7 December 2023.' 'Whether the plaintiffs established a real danger that the second defendant would dispose of assets within the jurisdiction so that any judgment in favour of the plaintiffs would be unsatisfied.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to prove to the requisite degree that there was a real danger of the second defendant disposing of assets within the jurisdiction so as to leave any judgment unsatisfied; the sale of one family home and purchase of another, in the circumstances explained by the evidence, did not establish asset dissipation.

Court Disposition

Application to extend the operation of the freezing order declined.

Orders

  • ['No extension of the form of freezing order made on 30 November 2023 was granted.']