Donaldson v Worrells (Liquidator), in the Matter of Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 180

Donaldson v Worrells (Liquidator), in the Matter of Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 180

The Supreme Court of Western Australia is the more appropriate forum in the interests of justice, given all parties’ and relevant facts’ connection to Western Australia and prior materially similar proceedings there; a costs order is appropriate but not on an indemnity basis as the applicant, being self-represented, may not have realised the lack of connection to Victoria, and there is insufficient basis for indemnity costs.

Parties
Applicant: John Rawson Donaldson; First Respondent: Worrells (Voluntary Liquidator); Second Respondent: Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd (in liquidation)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Pre Action Discovery; Interlocutory Application for Transfer / Interlocutory (application for Transfer of Proceedings)
Outcome
Proceedings transferred to the Supreme Court of Western Australia; costs order in favour of Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd (in liquidation); no indemnity costs; no costs order against first respondent.
Legal Topics
Cross Vesting of Jurisdiction, Transfer of Proceedings, Costs, Appropriate Forum
Practice and Procedure Corporations Law Corporate Insolvency Cross Vesting of Jurisdiction Transfer of Proceedings Costs Appropriate Forum

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Rawson Donaldson

Applicant

Worrells (Voluntary Liquidator)

First Respondent

Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd (in liquidation)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Pre Action Discovery; Interlocutory Application for Transfer / Interlocutory (application for Transfer of Proceedings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court of Western Australia is a more appropriate forum for determination of the proceedings
  2. 2 Whether an order for indemnity costs is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Western Australia is the more appropriate forum in the interests of justice, given all parties’ and relevant facts’ connection to Western Australia and prior materially similar proceedings there; a costs order is appropriate but not on an indemnity basis as the applicant, being self-represented, may not have realised the lack of connection to Victoria, and there is insufficient basis for indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

Proceedings transferred to the Supreme Court of Western Australia; costs order in favour of Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd (in liquidation); no indemnity costs; no costs order against first respondent.

Orders

  • The whole of the proceedings be transferred to the Supreme Court of Western Australia pursuant to s 5(4)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth).
  • The applicant pay the costs of Suffolk Investments Pty Ltd (in liquidation) of and incidental to the interlocutory application filed on 20 December 2018, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement.