AUSTEN AND BUTTA LTD v SHELL AUSTRALIA LTD AND ANOR [1992] NSWCA 15

AUSTEN AND BUTTA LTD v SHELL AUSTRALIA LTD AND ANOR [1992] NSWCA 15

The Court was not persuaded that the PtA statement was misleading as alleged or that there was sufficient reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of Young J, justifying the granting of leave to appeal.

Parties
Plaintiff: Austen and Butta Ltd; First Defendant: Shell Australia Ltd; Other Defendant: Anor
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 April 1992
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Misleading Statements, Interlocutory Injunction
Corporations Misleading Statements Interlocutory Injunction

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Austen and Butta Ltd

Plaintiff

Shell Australia Ltd

First Defendant

Anor

Other Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the PtA statement dispatched to shareholders is misleading regarding the Dartbrook joint venture project
  2. 2 Whether there is sufficient reason to doubt the correctness of Young J's refusal of the interlocutory injunction restraining dispatch of the PtA statement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not persuaded that the PtA statement was misleading as alleged or that there was sufficient reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of Young J, justifying the granting of leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.
  • The existing injunction be dissolved.