Woods v Woods [1999] NSWSC 584

Woods v Woods [1999] NSWSC 584

Mareva relief was justified because the contract had been established, costs had already been ordered, there was a prima facie case for damages, and the plaintiffs' secretiveness and lack of candour concerning the sale of the Cresthaven Avenue property and destination of its proceeds showed a danger that any judgment in favour of the first defendant would not be satisfied unless the sale proceeds were preserved.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 1999
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings Concerning Mareva Injunctive Relief / First Defendant's Motion for Further Mareva Relief After Substantive Judgment Finding a Binding Contract
Outcome
Injunctive relief granted.
Legal Topics
['mareva Injunctions' 'asset Preservation' 'specific Performance' 'damages in Lieu of Specific Performance' 'secretive Sale of Property']
['equity' 'civil Procedure' 'contract'] ['mareva Injunctions' 'asset Preservation' 'specific Performance' 'damages in Lieu of Specific Performance' 'secretive Sale of Property']

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

Equity Proceedings Concerning Mareva Injunctive Relief / First Defendant's Motion for Further Mareva Relief After Substantive Judgment Finding a Binding Contract

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the first defendant had established a prima facie cause of action sufficient for Mareva relief.' 'Whether there was a danger that assets would be removed, disposed of or otherwise dealt with so that any judgment in favour of the first defendant would not be satisfied.' 'Whether the proceeds of sale of the Cresthaven Avenue property should be paid into Court or placed in an account to abide further order.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mareva relief was justified because the contract had been established, costs had already been ordered, there was a prima facie case for damages, and the plaintiffs' secretiveness and lack of candour concerning the sale of the Cresthaven Avenue property and destination of its proceeds showed a danger that any judgment in favour of the first defendant would not be satisfied unless the sale proceeds were preserved.

Court Disposition

Injunctive relief granted.

Orders

  • ['The $170,000 was required to be paid into Court or placed in an account to abide the further order of the Court.']