Orison P/L v Strategic Minerals Corporation NL & Ors [1987] FCA 599

Orison P/L v Strategic Minerals Corporation NL & Ors [1987] FCA 599

The existence of common questions of fact in both proceedings arising out of the acquisition of AMF shares and representations warrants an order for joint trial.

Parties
Applicant: Orison Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Strategic Minerals Corporation NL; Second Respondent: Peter Gullan Cross; Second Respondent: Jon Swire-Thompson; Third Respondent: Asha Capital Corporation Limited; Fourth Respondent: Asha Energy Corporation Limited; First Applicant: Peter Gullan Cross; First Applicant: Jon Swire-Thompson; Second Applicant: Leonas Reisgys; Third Applicant: Peter Ruttledge; First Respondent: Denis Devenish-Meares; Second Respondent: Richard J. Tanner; Third Respondent: Walter Arthur Charles Martin
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 October 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil / Pre Trial Directions/order for Joint Trial
Outcome
Order for joint trial granted; applicants' costs of directions to be paid by respondents
Legal Topics
Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Acquisition of Shares, Joint Trial of Proceedings
Corporations Trade Practices Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Acquisition of Shares Joint Trial of Proceedings

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Orison Pty Ltd

Applicant

Strategic Minerals Corporation NL

First Respondent

Peter Gullan Cross

Second Respondent

Jon Swire-Thompson

Second Respondent

Asha Capital Corporation Limited

Third Respondent

Asha Energy Corporation Limited

Fourth Respondent

Peter Gullan Cross

First Applicant

Jon Swire-Thompson

First Applicant

Leonas Reisgys

Second Applicant

Peter Ruttledge

Third Applicant

Denis Devenish-Meares

First Respondent

Richard J. Tanner

Second Respondent

Walter Arthur Charles Martin

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Pre Trial Directions/order for Joint Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings WAG 42 and WAG 52 should be tried together
  2. 2 Whether misleading or deceptive conduct occurred contrary to s.52 Trade Practices Act 1974

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of common questions of fact in both proceedings arising out of the acquisition of AMF shares and representations warrants an order for joint trial.

Court Disposition

Order for joint trial granted; applicants' costs of directions to be paid by respondents

Orders

  • Actions in WAG 42 and 52 of 1987 be tried at the same time
  • Applicants' costs of these directions be paid by the respondents in any event