CCSG Legal Pty Ltd & Anor v Commonwealth Bank of Australia & Ors [2023] NSWSC 1276

CCSG Legal Pty Ltd & Anor v Commonwealth Bank of Australia & Ors [2023] NSWSC 1276

Applying the principles in Shaw Building Group Pty Ltd v Narayan (No 2), the second plaintiff was entitled to return of the monies paid into the fraudulent accounts, and the first plaintiff was also entitled to an order because it was the party to whom the monies were ostensibly paid and the entity from which the money was stolen. The first defendant could be directed to transfer funds held in the accounts, but the transfer from the initial fraudulent account was reduced by $124.76 because that pre-existing balance was not received from the second plaintiff and could not be treated as monies had and received from the plaintiffs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings for Monies Had and Received / Principal Judgment Following Hearing for Orders Compelling Return of Funds and Release of Money Held in Accounts
Outcome
Judgment for the first plaintiff and the second plaintiff against the second and third defendants, with pre-judgment interest, costs, and orders directing the first defendant to transfer account funds to the second plaintiff subject to a $124.76 reduction.
Legal Topics
['monies Had and Received' 'fraudulent Bank Account Impersonation' 'stolen Money' 'freezing Orders' 'pre Judgment Interest']
['equity' 'restitution' 'unjust Enrichment'] ['monies Had and Received' 'fraudulent Bank Account Impersonation' 'stolen Money' 'freezing Orders' 'pre Judgment Interest']

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 for Monies Had and Received / Principal Judgment Following Hearing for Orders Compelling Return of Funds and Release of Money Held in Accounts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment against the second and third defendants for money paid into fraudulent accounts.' "Whether the first defendant should be directed to transfer funds held in the second and third defendants' accounts to the second plaintiff." 'Whether the amount to be transferred from the initial fraudulent account should be reduced by the pre-existing balance in that account.' 'Whether pre-judgment interest should be awarded under s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.']

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the principles in Shaw Building Group Pty Ltd v Narayan (No 2), the second plaintiff was entitled to return of the monies paid into the fraudulent accounts, and the first plaintiff was also entitled to an order because it was the party to whom the monies were ostensibly paid and the entity from which the money was stolen. The first defendant could be directed to transfer funds held in the accounts, but the transfer from the initial fraudulent account was reduced by $124.76 because that pre-existing balance was not received from the second plaintiff and could not be treated as monies had and received from the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the first plaintiff and the second plaintiff against the second and third defendants, with pre-judgment interest, costs, and orders directing the first defendant to transfer account funds to the second plaintiff subject to a $124.76 reduction.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the first plaintiff and the second plaintiff against the second and third defendants in the sum of $145,282.20.' 'The second and third defendants are to pay pre-judgment interest in the sum of $2,256.85, calculated in accordance with s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 from 19 August 2023 to 27...