Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Antares Energy Ltd (administrators appointed) (No 2) [2018] FCA 212

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Antares Energy Ltd (administrators appointed) (No 2) [2018] FCA 212

The Court was not satisfied that the documents had been brought to Mr Cruickshank's attention, so deemed service under r 10.23 was not appropriate. However, ASIC had attempted but been unable to effect service in accordance with the earlier orders permitting service in the United States, and the proposed combination of postal delivery, process server delivery, and email to persons connected with Mr Cruickshank gave rise to a reasonable probability that he would be informed of the documents. Substituted service under r 10.49(a) was therefore appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Deemed Service or Substituted Service / Interlocutory Application Heard on 27 February 2018
Outcome
Substituted service ordered under r 10.49(a) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
Legal Topics
['service Outside Australia' 'deemed Service' 'substituted Service' 'continuous Disclosure Obligations' 'director Duties']
['practice and Procedure' 'corporations'] ['service Outside Australia' 'deemed Service' 'substituted Service' 'continuous Disclosure Obligations' 'director Duties']

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

Application for Deemed Service or Substituted Service / Interlocutory Application Heard on 27 February 2018

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the court documents should be taken to have been served on Mr James Cruickshank under r 10.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).' 'Whether substituted service should be ordered under r 10.49(a) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) after attempted service in the United States under the Hague Convention was unsuccessful.' "Whether alternative steps should be specified under r 10.49(b) to bring the documents to Mr Cruickshank's attention."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not satisfied that the documents had been brought to Mr Cruickshank's attention, so deemed service under r 10.23 was not appropriate. However, ASIC had attempted but been unable to effect service in accordance with the earlier orders permitting service in the United States, and the proposed combination of postal delivery, process server delivery, and email to persons connected with Mr Cruickshank gave rise to a reasonable probability that he would be informed of the documents. Substituted service under r 10.49(a) was therefore appropriate.

Court Disposition

Substituted service ordered under r 10.49(a) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to Rule 10.49(a) of the Federal Court Rules, the plaintiff may serve copies of the originating process dated 27 November 2017, the concise statement dated 27 November 2017, the interlocutory process dated 28 November 2017, the affidavits of Vincent Geneste sworn 28 November 2017 and 4 December 2017, the...