Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Top Snack Foods Pty Ltd & Ors [1997] FCA 1547

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Top Snack Foods Pty Ltd & Ors [1997] FCA 1547

The Court was not satisfied on the evidence that there was a need to increase trust payments or permit a mortgage for legal expenses, and considered that permitting the mortgage would substantially diminish the efficacy of the Mareva relief. The applicant's motion orders were therefore made, with paragraph (b) replacing the earlier form of order and with a variation preventing notice to vary before 15 January 1998.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 1997
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Concerning Mareva Injunction Orders / Interlocutory Motion
Outcome
Applicant's Notice of Motion granted with variations; leave to vary the previous Mareva order to permit increased payments or a mortgage for legal fees was refused.
Legal Topics
['mareva Injunction' 'variation of Interlocutory Orders' 'asset Restraint' 'costs in the Cause']
['civil Procedure' 'injunctions'] ['mareva Injunction' 'variation of Interlocutory Orders' 'asset Restraint' 'costs in the Cause']

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

Notice of Motion Concerning Mareva Injunction Orders / Interlocutory Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Mareva injunction should be varied to permit increased withdrawals for infant beneficiaries of the KN Trust from $200 per week to $500 per week.' 'Whether Gatsios Holdings Pty Ltd should be permitted to mortgage property to a maximum amount of $50,000 to pay legal expenses.' "Whether the orders sought in the applicant's Notice of Motion should be made."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not satisfied on the evidence that there was a need to increase trust payments or permit a mortgage for legal expenses, and considered that permitting the mortgage would substantially diminish the efficacy of the Mareva relief. The applicant's motion orders were therefore made, with paragraph (b) replacing the earlier form of order and with a variation preventing notice to vary before 15 January 1998.

Court Disposition

Applicant's Notice of Motion granted with variations; leave to vary the previous Mareva order to permit increased payments or a mortgage for legal fees was refused.

Orders

  • ['Orders 1, 2, 3 and 4 as in the Motion were made.' 'Paragraph (b) shall replace the earlier form of the order.' 'Order 3 as framed in the Motion was varied so that no notice to vary shall be given by Gatsios before 15 January 1998.' 'Liberty was reserved to Gatsios to apply on 14 days notice.' 'The costs of the...