Cribb v Kingsbury [2020] FCA 551

Cribb v Kingsbury [2020] FCA 551

Although the defendants' explanation for delay, based on a misunderstanding of the orders, was not particularly satisfactory, the plaintiffs had not shown specific prejudice from the late filing and the Court noted the difficulties under which everyone was operating during the COVID-19 crisis. In all the circumstances, the appropriate interlocutory orders were those proposed by the defendants, with costs in the cause.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial and Corporations; Corporations and Corporate Insolvency / Interlocutory Case Management Determined on the Papers
Outcome
Defendants' proposed interlocutory case management orders made; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['voidable Transactions' 'unfair Preferences' 'unreasonable Director Related Transactions' 'insolvent Trading' 'case Management' 'late Evidence' 'court Book and Objections']
['corporations Law' 'corporate Insolvency' 'civil Procedure'] ['voidable Transactions' 'unfair Preferences' 'unreasonable Director Related Transactions' 'insolvent Trading' 'case Management' 'late Evidence' 'court Book and Objections']

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

Commercial and Corporations; Corporations and Corporate Insolvency / Interlocutory Case Management Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants should be permitted to serve a further affidavit of Adrian Charles Steven Catlin despite delay in filing further evidence.' 'What interlocutory timetable should be made for documents, affidavits, objections, court book, submissions, chronology and authorities before trial.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defendants' explanation for delay, based on a misunderstanding of the orders, was not particularly satisfactory, the plaintiffs had not shown specific prejudice from the late filing and the Court noted the difficulties under which everyone was operating during the COVID-19 crisis. In all the circumstances, the appropriate interlocutory orders were those proposed by the defendants, with costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Defendants' proposed interlocutory case management orders made; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['The Defendants serve an affidavit of Adrian Charles Steven Catlin on or before 7 May 2020.' 'The Plaintiffs serve a list of documents and affidavits to be included in a draft Index on or before 14 May 2020.' 'The Defendants serve a list of documents and affidavits to be included in a draft index to a Court Book by...