CIP Group Pty Ltd v So (No 3) [2023] FCA 518

CIP Group Pty Ltd v So (No 3) [2023] FCA 518

The Court found that there is a serious question to be tried regarding the applicants’ entitlement to proceeds from further land sales (and the enforceability of tracing and constructive trust claims), that the balance of convenience favours preserving those proceeds to prevent frustration of potential relief, and that the applicants should be granted injunctive relief on condition that they seek to join all necessary interested parties (Ms Wong, Ms Leung, and SEL) within a specified period. The orders preserve the status quo without finally deciding the ultimate questions of proprietary entitlement or indefeasibility in the hands of UIP.

Parties
Applicant: CIP Group Pty Ltd; Applicant: CIP 1 Pty Ltd; Applicant: Pyrmont Portfolio Pty Ltd; Respondent: Shan Ngai So; Respondent: GGPG Pty Ltd; Respondent: Park Ridge 94 Pty Ltd; Respondent: Park Ridge 96 and 98 Pty Ltd; Respondent: Park Ridge 132 Pty Ltd; Respondent: 168 Park Ridge Pty Ltd; Respondent: Park Ridge 180 Pty Ltd; Respondent: Rochedale Holdings Pty Ltd; Respondent: Rochedale Holdings No. 1 Pty Ltd; Respondent: GGPG Developments (No.48) Pty Ltd; Respondent: Park Ridge Development Management Pty Ltd; Respondent: Coorparoo Holdings Pty Ltd; Respondent: Axis North Pty Ltd; Respondent: SIP Group Pty Ltd; Respondent: SIP Pty Ltd; Respondent: MT Family Pty Ltd; Respondent: Ultimate Investment Portfolio Pty Ltd; Respondent: UIP 1 Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted (conditional on joining further parties)
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Derivative Proceedings, Constructive Trust, Fiduciary Duties, Parties Necessary to Proceedings, Equitable Tracing, Indefeasibility of Title, Joinder of Parties

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 7 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CIP Group Pty Ltd

Applicant

CIP 1 Pty Ltd

Applicant

Pyrmont Portfolio Pty Ltd

Applicant

Shan Ngai So

Respondent

GGPG Pty Ltd

Respondent

Park Ridge 94 Pty Ltd

Respondent

Park Ridge 96 and 98 Pty Ltd

Respondent

Park Ridge 132 Pty Ltd

Respondent

168 Park Ridge Pty Ltd

Respondent

Park Ridge 180 Pty Ltd

Respondent

Rochedale Holdings Pty Ltd

Respondent

Rochedale Holdings No. 1 Pty Ltd

Respondent

GGPG Developments (No.48) Pty Ltd

Respondent

Park Ridge Development Management Pty Ltd

Respondent

Coorparoo Holdings Pty Ltd

Respondent

Axis North Pty Ltd

Respondent

SIP Group Pty Ltd

Respondent

SIP Pty Ltd

Respondent

MT Family Pty Ltd

Respondent

Ultimate Investment Portfolio Pty Ltd

Respondent

UIP 1 Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Injunction

  1. 1 Whether injunctive relief should be granted to prevent disposal of disputed assets pending trial
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious question to be tried regarding parties’ entitlement to proceeds of property sales
  3. 3 Whether all necessary parties are joined to the proceeding

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that there is a serious question to be tried regarding the applicants’ entitlement to proceeds from further land sales (and the enforceability of tracing and constructive trust claims), that the balance of convenience favours preserving those proceeds to prevent frustration of potential relief, and that the applicants should be granted injunctive relief on condition that they seek to join all necessary interested parties (Ms Wong, Ms Leung, and SEL) within a specified period. The orders preserve the status quo without finally deciding the ultimate questions of proprietary entitlement or indefeasibility in the hands of UIP.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted (conditional on joining further parties)

Orders

  • The first and fourteenth to eighteenth respondents must notify applicants of any proposed sale of specified properties and must not deal with the proceeds except as directed and to hold such proceeds on trust.
  • Such orders to operate until further order or unless earlier consent is given, and cease if requisite application to join specified parties is not made within 21 days.