Finstro Securities Pty Ltd v Gosatti [2021] NSWSC 635

Finstro Securities Pty Ltd v Gosatti [2021] NSWSC 635

Mr and Mrs Gosatti did not establish that the interests of justice required transfer or that it was more appropriate for the proceedings to be determined by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Relevant events occurred in both New South Wales and Western Australia; the location of parties, witnesses and representatives was neutral given the availability of remote participation; no issue involved law unique to Western Australia; related Western Australian proceedings were not significant; and, with other considerations balanced, the parties' agreement that New South Wales law governed and that the guarantors submitted to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of New South Wales courts was a...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure; Cross Vesting Application / Motion by Mr and Mrs Gosatti to Transfer the Proceedings to the Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
The motion was dismissed and Mr and Mrs Gosatti were ordered to bear the costs of the motion, as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['transfer of Proceedings' 'appropriate Forum' 'interests of Justice' 'governing Law and Jurisdiction Clause' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'cross Vesting' 'jurisdiction'] ['transfer of Proceedings' 'appropriate Forum' 'interests of Justice' 'governing Law and Jurisdiction Clause' 'costs']

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

Practice and Procedure; Cross Vesting Application / Motion by Mr and Mrs Gosatti to Transfer the Proceedings to the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was more appropriate or otherwise in the interests of justice for the proceedings to be determined by the Supreme Court of Western Australia under s 5(2) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (NSW).' 'Whether the connecting factors with Western Australia outweighed the connecting factors with New South Wales.' 'What significance should be given to the agreed governing law and non-exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of New South Wales courts.' 'Whether proceedings in the Supreme Court of Western Australia concerning a statutory demand issued to Miluc made transfer appropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr and Mrs Gosatti did not establish that the interests of justice required transfer or that it was more appropriate for the proceedings to be determined by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Relevant events occurred in both New South Wales and Western Australia; the location of parties, witnesses and representatives was neutral given the availability of remote participation; no issue involved law unique to Western Australia; related Western Australian proceedings were not significant; and, with other considerations balanced, the parties' agreement that New South Wales law governed and that the guarantors submitted to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of New South Wales courts was a...

Court Disposition

The motion was dismissed and Mr and Mrs Gosatti were ordered to bear the costs of the motion, as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['The motion is dismissed.' 'Mr and Mrs Gosatti must bear the costs of the motion, as agreed or assessed.']