Blue Mirror Pty Ltd v Pegasus Australia Developments Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1613

Blue Mirror Pty Ltd v Pegasus Australia Developments Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1613

Additional asset disclosure and reporting orders are appropriate given concerns about possible fraud, large sums transferred, close familial relationships among actors, and the need to trace funds for effective asset preservation. Limiting disclosure obligations or excluding family-related communications is not warranted in these circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Mareva Injunction (asset Preservation) / Interlocutory Application for Extension and Variation of Mareva and Asset Disclosure Orders
Outcome
Mareva order extended; asset disclosure order varied as sought by plaintiff; application to narrow or delay disclosure refused.
Legal Topics
['mareva Injunction' 'asset Preservation Order' 'asset Disclosure' 'fraud Allegation' 'covid 19 Commercial Disputes']
['equity' 'civil Procedure'] ['mareva Injunction' 'asset Preservation Order' 'asset Disclosure' 'fraud Allegation' 'covid 19 Commercial Disputes']

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

Mareva Injunction (asset Preservation) / Interlocutory Application for Extension and Variation of Mareva and Asset Disclosure Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether asset disclosure order should be extended and additional disclosure obligations imposed' 'Whether asset disclosure order should be limited in time or scope as sought by interested party' 'Whether communications of a family nature should be excised from disclosure obligations']

Ratio Decidendi

Additional asset disclosure and reporting orders are appropriate given concerns about possible fraud, large sums transferred, close familial relationships among actors, and the need to trace funds for effective asset preservation. Limiting disclosure obligations or excluding family-related communications is not warranted in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

Mareva order extended; asset disclosure order varied as sought by plaintiff; application to narrow or delay disclosure refused.

Orders

  • ['Mareva (asset preservation) order extended in respect of Tan & Tan Australia Pty Limited.' 'Additional asset disclosure orders made: weekly reports from Tan & Tan to plaintiff regarding asset acquisitions, sales, accruals, and payments by 4pm each Friday.' 'Requests to limit asset disclosure obligation to assets...