Australian Securities & Investments Commission v GDK Financial Solutions Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 6) [2010] FCA 1092
ZMB Australia Pty Ltd and Young Turks Pty Ltd could not maintain claims to the fund because their interests in the Mews Scheme proceeds had been validly assigned, first from Young Turks to ZMB, then from ZMB to Touma Pty Ltd; accordingly, their application should be dismissed and costs ordered against them but only on a standard basis.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 October 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Interlocutory Application Within Representative Proceeding / Ruling and Orders on Interlocutory Application; Costs; Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Interlocutory application dismissed; costs awarded to seventh defendant against thirteenth and fourteenth defendants; leave to appeal granted (if required).
- Legal Topics
- ['representative Proceedings' 'compromise of Proceedings' 'costs' 'assignment of Interests']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application Within Representative Proceeding / Ruling and Orders on Interlocutory Application; Costs; Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether ZMB Australia Pty Ltd and Young Turks Pty Ltd could maintain a claim to the proceeds of sale of the Mews land after the assignment of interest to Touma Pty Ltd' 'Whether indemnity costs should be ordered against ZMB and Young Turks in relation to the interlocutory application' 'Whether a representative party has power to compromise proceedings on behalf of the group']
Ratio Decidendi
ZMB Australia Pty Ltd and Young Turks Pty Ltd could not maintain claims to the fund because their interests in the Mews Scheme proceeds had been validly assigned, first from Young Turks to ZMB, then from ZMB to Touma Pty Ltd; accordingly, their application should be dismissed and costs ordered against them but only on a standard basis.
Court Disposition
Interlocutory application dismissed; costs awarded to seventh defendant against thirteenth and fourteenth defendants; leave to appeal granted (if required).
Orders
- ['The Interlocutory Process filed 23 April 2009 be dismissed.' "The thirteenth and fourteenth defendants pay the seventh defendant's costs of and incidental to the Interlocutory Process, including any reserved costs, such costs to be fixed and paid forthwith notwithstanding that the principal proceeding is not...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment