ASIC V Somerville [2009] NSWSC 1149

ASIC V Somerville [2009] NSWSC 1149

Although Mr Somerville's appeal was arguable, the balance of convenience did not favour granting a stay of the disqualification order or granting leave to manage a company. There was no real evidence of hardship or prejudice that would make it appropriate to exercise the discretion in his favour, as Mr Somerville's involvement as a director was not shown to be necessary for the practice nor was any specific financial hardship established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Equity Proceedings Under the Corporations Act / Application for Stay Pending Appeal and Alternative Application for Leave Under S 206 G
Outcome
Applications for stay and for leave under s 206G dismissed. Short temporary stay granted to first defendant as per undertaking and order.
Legal Topics
['disqualification From Managing Corporations' 'stay of Orders Pending Appeal' 'leave to Manage Corporation Pending Appeal' 'balance of Convenience' 'legal Profession Regulation']
['corporations Law'] ['disqualification From Managing Corporations' 'stay of Orders Pending Appeal' 'leave to Manage Corporation Pending Appeal' 'balance of Convenience' 'legal Profession Regulation']

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

Interlocutory Application in Equity Proceedings Under the Corporations Act / Application for Stay Pending Appeal and Alternative Application for Leave Under S 206 G

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to grant a stay of a disqualification order under s 206C of the Corporations Act pending appeal' 'Whether to grant leave under s 206G to manage a company pending appeal' 'Balance of convenience for granting interlocutory relief']

Ratio Decidendi

Although Mr Somerville's appeal was arguable, the balance of convenience did not favour granting a stay of the disqualification order or granting leave to manage a company. There was no real evidence of hardship or prejudice that would make it appropriate to exercise the discretion in his favour, as Mr Somerville's involvement as a director was not shown to be necessary for the practice nor was any specific financial hardship established.

Court Disposition

Applications for stay and for leave under s 206G dismissed. Short temporary stay granted to first defendant as per undertaking and order.

Orders

  • ['The amended interlocutory process is dismissed with costs.' 'Upon the undertaking of the first defendant, stay of orders of 24 September 2009 to the extent necessary to enable management of Somerville & Co Pty Limited until 5pm on 2 November 2009.']