Garrett v National Australia Bank Limited [2009] FCA 191

Garrett v National Australia Bank Limited [2009] FCA 191

The statement of claim had to be struck out because it contained claims and transactions concerning parties or capacities in which the applicant had no standing, and because the claims against the second to sixth respondents depended on untenable allegations of agency and alleged criminal breaches over which the Federal Court had no general criminal jurisdiction. Section 19 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) did not confer that jurisdiction. The proceeding against the second to sixth respondents was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Civil Proceeding Commenced by Originating Application and Statement of Claim / Consideration of Statement of Claim Filed on 31 October 2008 and Whether It Should Be Struck Out
Outcome
Statement of claim filed on 31 October 2008 struck out; proceeding against the second to sixth respondents dismissed.
Legal Topics
['strike Out of Statement of Claim' 'standing' 'representative Proceedings or Representative Capacity' 'referral for Legal Assistance Under O 80 of the Federal Court Rules' 'federal Court Criminal Jurisdiction' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct']
['federal Civil Procedure' 'federal Jurisdiction' 'trade Practices' 'corporations and Insolvency' 'criminal Law'] ['strike Out of Statement of Claim' 'standing' 'representative Proceedings or Representative Capacity' 'referral for Legal Assistance Under O 80 of the Federal Court Rules' 'federal Court Criminal Jurisdiction' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Federal Court Civil Proceeding Commenced by Originating Application and Statement of Claim / Consideration of Statement of Claim Filed on 31 October 2008 and Whether It Should Be Struck Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's statement of claim filed on 31 October 2008 set out causes of action precisely, simply and clearly or should be struck out." 'Whether the applicant had standing to bring claims in the capacities of trustee, joint trustee, shareholder, unit holder, or in his own behalf after a sequestration order.' 'Whether the Federal Court had jurisdiction over alleged breaches of State and Commonwealth criminal laws pleaded against the second to sixth respondents.' 'Whether s 19 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) conferred the asserted criminal jurisdiction.' 'Whether the proceeding as against the second to sixth respondents should be dismissed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The statement of claim had to be struck out because it contained claims and transactions concerning parties or capacities in which the applicant had no standing, and because the claims against the second to sixth respondents depended on untenable allegations of agency and alleged criminal breaches over which the Federal Court had no general criminal jurisdiction. Section 19 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) did not confer that jurisdiction. The proceeding against the second to sixth respondents was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Statement of claim filed on 31 October 2008 struck out; proceeding against the second to sixth respondents dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The statement of claim filed on 31 October 2008 be struck out.' 'The proceeding as it relates to the second to sixth respondents be dismissed.']