Multiplex Funds Management Limited v P Dawson Nominees Pty Limited [2007] FCAFC 200

Multiplex Funds Management Limited v P Dawson Nominees Pty Limited [2007] FCAFC 200

The definition of the representative group by reference to persons who entered a litigation funding agreement is not inconsistent with Pt IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act. The presence of practical disincentives to opt out does not contravene s 33J. The appellants failed to demonstrate inefficiency, inappropriateness, or any grounds under s 33N(1) justifying discontinuance of the representative proceeding. The appeals are dismissed and the representative proceeding continues.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding (class Action) Appeal / Full Federal Court Appeal, Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['representative Proceedings' 'class Actions' 'litigation Funding Agreements' 'opt in and Opt Out Procedures' 'interests of Justice']
['practice and Procedure' 'corporations Law'] ['representative Proceedings' 'class Actions' 'litigation Funding Agreements' 'opt in and Opt Out Procedures' 'interests of Justice']

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

Representative Proceeding (class Action) Appeal / Full Federal Court Appeal, Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a proceeding defined by group members who entered a litigation funding agreement is inconsistent with Pt IVA of the Federal Court Act' 'Whether the discretionary power under s 33N(1) to discontinue a representative proceeding is enlivened by such a definition' "Whether the definition of the group is contrary to the 'opt out' character of Pt IVA" 'Whether practical disincentives to opt out created by litigation funding agreements violate s 33J' 'Whether risk of multiple representative proceedings creates inefficiency justifying discontinuance under s 33N(1)']

Ratio Decidendi

The definition of the representative group by reference to persons who entered a litigation funding agreement is not inconsistent with Pt IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act. The presence of practical disincentives to opt out does not contravene s 33J. The appellants failed to demonstrate inefficiency, inappropriateness, or any grounds under s 33N(1) justifying discontinuance of the representative proceeding. The appeals are dismissed and the representative proceeding continues.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted to each appellant.' 'Appeal dismissed in each proceeding.' 'Appellant to pay the costs of the first respondent.']