Oasis Fund Management Limited & Ors v ABN Amro Bank NV & Ors [2009] NSWSC 1322

Oasis Fund Management Limited & Ors v ABN Amro Bank NV & Ors [2009] NSWSC 1322

The Court concluded that only certain claims—those of the first to fourth plaintiffs, Plummer, Bezawo Pty Ltd, and all cross-claims for contribution to these parties—were appropriate for initial determination as separate questions. Claims relating to misleading or deceptive conduct were not to be included as common...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Plaintiff: Oasis Fund Management Limited; Plaintiff: Oasis Asset Management Limited; Plaintiff: Robert Anthony Ford; Plaintiff: Harold Keith Manns; Defendant: ABN Amro Bank NV; Defendant: Deon Joubert; Cross Defendant to Third & Fifth Cross Claim: Paulwen Holdings; Cross Defendant to Third and Fifth Cross Claim: Paul Godwin Plummer; Cross Defendant to Third and Fifth Cross Claim: Richard Gary Isachsen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Equity, Representative Action, Commercial Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Separate Question Orders)
Outcome
Application for separate questions largely granted in line with defendants’ submissions; misleading and deceptive conduct case excluded from initial separate question regime.
Legal Topics
Separate Question Orders, Representative Proceedings, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Investment Schemes, Cross Claims
Civil Procedure Equity Commercial Law Separate Question Orders Representative Proceedings Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Investment Schemes Cross Claims

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oasis Fund Management Limited

Plaintiff

Oasis Asset Management Limited

Plaintiff

Robert Anthony Ford

Plaintiff

Harold Keith Manns

Plaintiff

ABN Amro Bank NV

Defendant

Deon Joubert

Defendant

Paulwen Holdings

Cross Defendant to Third & Fifth Cross Claim

Paul Godwin Plummer

Cross Defendant to Third and Fifth Cross Claim

Richard Gary Isachsen

Cross Defendant to Third and Fifth Cross Claim

Procedural Posture

Equity, Representative Action, Commercial Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Separate Question Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain questions should be determined separately prior to the rest of the proceedings
  2. 2 Whether misleading or deceptive conduct cases constitute common questions suitable for separate determination
  3. 3 Application of procedural rules for representative proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded that only certain claims—those of the first to fourth plaintiffs, Plummer, Bezawo Pty Ltd, and all cross-claims for contribution to these parties—were appropriate for initial determination as separate questions. Claims relating to misleading or deceptive conduct were not to be included as common questions for separate determination due to differences among affected groups and the risk of injustice.

Court Disposition

Application for separate questions largely granted in line with defendants’ submissions; misleading and deceptive conduct case excluded from initial separate question regime.

Orders

  • Separate question to be framed for initial determination of claims of first to fourth plaintiffs, Plummer, Bezawo Pty Ltd, and all cross-claims for contribution to those parties.
  • Claims of Ford and Manns and related cross-claims to be included in the separate question determination.