Australian Securities and Investments Commission v CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1070

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1070

ASIC made out grounds for appointment of a receiver under s 1323(1)(h) of the Corporations Act; therefore, the Court had the power under s 23 of the Federal Court of Australia Act to make a general freezing order instead, given the risk of asset dissipation and ongoing business activities. The restraining and preservation orders were appropriate to protect the interests of aggrieved persons pending further proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Corporations/interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Orders Made; Reasons for Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Application for restraining and preservation orders allowed
Legal Topics
['freezing Orders' 'preservation of Assets' 'injunctions' 'financial Services Licensing' 'protection of Aggrieved Persons' 'appointment of Receivers']
['corporations Law' 'commercial Law'] ['freezing Orders' 'preservation of Assets' 'injunctions' 'financial Services Licensing' 'protection of Aggrieved Persons' 'appointment of Receivers']

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

Corporations/interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Orders Made; Reasons for Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court has power to grant freezing orders under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and s 23 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) absent appointment of a receiver' 'Whether restraining and preservation orders are necessary or desirable to protect interests of aggrieved persons' 'Whether ASIC made out a prima facie case for interlocutory relief']

Ratio Decidendi

ASIC made out grounds for appointment of a receiver under s 1323(1)(h) of the Corporations Act; therefore, the Court had the power under s 23 of the Federal Court of Australia Act to make a general freezing order instead, given the risk of asset dissipation and ongoing business activities. The restraining and preservation orders were appropriate to protect the interests of aggrieved persons pending further proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application for restraining and preservation orders allowed

Orders

  • ['Each respondent restrained from dealing with property as specified until further order' 'Fourth respondent permitted to pay ordinary living and operating expenses up to $1,000 per week' "Respondents allowed to incur reasonable costs for these proceedings and any criminal proceedings arising from ASIC's...