Fineston Company Ltd v Jastec Australia Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 1435

A prima facie case of misappropriation and asset dissipation by the defendants, coupled with evidence of risk that judgment may be unsatisfied, warrants the issuing of a freezing order.

Parties: Plaintiff: Fineston Company Ltd; First Defendant: Jastec Australia Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Chang Yeoi Lee
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 05 October 2016
Procedural Posture: Interlocutory Application / Application for Freezing Order
Outcome: Freezing order made
Legal Topics: Freezing Order, Interlocutory Relief, Misappropriation of Property, Joint Venture Agreement

Equity Practice and Procedure Freezing Order Interlocutory Relief Misappropriation of Property Joint Venture Agreement

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 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Fineston Company Ltd

Plaintiff

Jastec Australia Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Chang Yeoi Lee

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Freezing Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether a prima facie case exists that the defendant has misappropriated property and failed to account for sale proceeds under a joint-venture agreement
2 Whether there is a danger that a prospective judgment will be unsatisfied absent interlocutory relief

Ratio Decidendi

A prima facie case of misappropriation and asset dissipation by the defendants, coupled with evidence of risk that judgment may be unsatisfied, warrants the issuing of a freezing order.

Court Disposition

Freezing order made

Orders

Freezing order made in the terms of the document called 'Freezing Orders' initialled and placed with the papers
Orders made in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 6 of the document called 'Orders' as dated