Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Ocean Salvage Ltd [1999] FCA 340

Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Ocean Salvage Ltd [1999] FCA 340

The variation application was refused because the interlocutory hearing was only six days away and the evidence did not establish sufficient urgency or hardship: the tax instalment amount was not due until 7 April 1999, there was no evidence of when superannuation payments were due, no adequate evidence of outstanding or imminent legal costs, uncertainty as to whether claimed wage or commission liabilities arose before or after the interim injunction, and no evidence about available funds in other accounts or other resources of the second and third respondents.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Regulatory Proceeding Seeking Interlocutory Injunctive Relief / Application by the Second and Third Respondents to Vary Ex Parte Interim Orders Restraining Dealing With Funds Before the Interlocutory Injunction Hearing
Outcome
Application refused with liberty to renew.
Legal Topics
['ex Parte Interim Orders' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'variation of Interim Orders' 'restraint on Dealing With Bank Account Funds' 'urgency and Hardship']
['civil Procedure' 'equity' 'securities Regulation'] ['ex Parte Interim Orders' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'variation of Interim Orders' 'restraint on Dealing With Bank Account Funds' 'urgency and Hardship']

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

Civil Regulatory Proceeding Seeking Interlocutory Injunctive Relief / Application by the Second and Third Respondents to Vary Ex Parte Interim Orders Restraining Dealing With Funds Before the Interlocutory Injunction Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether interim orders restraining dealing with funds in two bank accounts should be varied before the interlocutory hearing to permit payment of wages or commissions, office expenses, legal costs, superannuation levies and tax instalment deductions.' 'Whether the evidence established sufficient urgency or hardship to justify varying the interim orders before the interlocutory application listed six days later.']

Ratio Decidendi

The variation application was refused because the interlocutory hearing was only six days away and the evidence did not establish sufficient urgency or hardship: the tax instalment amount was not due until 7 April 1999, there was no evidence of when superannuation payments were due, no adequate evidence of outstanding or imminent legal costs, uncertainty as to whether claimed wage or commission liabilities arose before or after the interim injunction, and no evidence about available funds in other accounts or other resources of the second and third respondents.

Court Disposition

Application refused with liberty to renew.

Orders

  • ['The application by the second and third respondents to vary the interim orders is refused.' 'The second and third respondents have liberty to renew the application at the completion of the hearing for interlocutory relief if interlocutory orders are then to be made.']