Commissioner of Taxation v Grimaldi (No. 4) [2009] FCA 748

Commissioner of Taxation v Grimaldi (No. 4) [2009] FCA 748

It was not a proper case in which additional interlocutory relief should be ordered beyond the applicant's current benefit; the application for continuation of freezing orders and a stay was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Commissioner of Taxation; First Respondent: Phillip Grimaldi; Second Respondent: Garry Bonaccorso; Third Respondent: IFTC Broking Services Ltd; Fourth Respondent: MGG Capital Pty Limited as Trustee for Webtel Management Super Fund; Fifth Respondent: International Finance Trust Company Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Determination of Application for Continuation of Freezing Orders
Outcome
Application for continuation of freezing orders and stay dismissed.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Interlocutory Relief, Foreign Corporations, Stay of Orders
Civil Procedure Freezing Orders Interlocutory Relief Foreign Corporations Stay of Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Taxation

Applicant

Phillip Grimaldi

First Respondent

Garry Bonaccorso

Second Respondent

IFTC Broking Services Ltd

Third Respondent

MGG Capital Pty Limited as Trustee for Webtel Management Super Fund

Fourth Respondent

International Finance Trust Company Ltd

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Determination of Application for Continuation of Freezing Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interlocutory freezing orders against third and fifth respondents should be continued
  2. 2 Whether a stay of the Court's earlier orders should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

It was not a proper case in which additional interlocutory relief should be ordered beyond the applicant's current benefit; the application for continuation of freezing orders and a stay was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for continuation of freezing orders and stay dismissed.

Orders

  • The application made on 9 July 2009 ore tenus for a stay and for continuation of interlocutory freezing orders against the third respondent and against the fifth respondent to the Notice of Motion filed in Court on 11 May 2009 be dismissed.