Reches Pty Ltd v Tadiran Ltd [1998] FCA 666

Reches Pty Ltd v Tadiran Ltd [1998] FCA 666

Mareva relief was refused because the respondent is a large, reputable foreign corporation with substantial assets, no evidence of likely default, and operates from a jurisdiction (Israel) with reciprocal enforcement of judgments with Australia; there was no serious risk that judgment could not be enforced. On...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 June 1998
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Motions / Judgment on Mareva Injunction and Security for Costs Motions
Outcome
Mareva injunction refused; security for costs arrangements varied; parties to agree on terms or return to court.
Legal Topics
['mareva Injunctions' 'security for Costs' 'reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments']
['civil Procedure' 'commercial Law'] ['mareva Injunctions' 'security for Costs' 'reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments']

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

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Motions / Judgment on Mareva Injunction and Security for Costs Motions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mareva relief (freezing order) should be granted against a reputable foreign corporation accustomed to paying its debts where payment under a contract is to be made outside Australia in the ordinary course of business and there is a reciprocal regime for judgment enforcement in the respondent's home country." 'Circumstances in which security for costs will be ordered against an impecunious corporate applicant, especially when those standing behind the company offer security by personal guarantees and mortgages.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mareva relief was refused because the respondent is a large, reputable foreign corporation with substantial assets, no evidence of likely default, and operates from a jurisdiction (Israel) with reciprocal enforcement of judgments with Australia; there was no serious risk that judgment could not be enforced. On security for costs, the applicant's offer of secured guarantee and property mortgage was accepted as appropriate security, provided $25,000 cash security is given, reducing the quantum of cash previously ordered on the basis that the security offered would likely exceed the total costs sought.

Court Disposition

Mareva injunction refused; security for costs arrangements varied; parties to agree on terms or return to court.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's notice of motion for Mareva relief filed on 19 September 1997 is dismissed." 'The applicant, within fourteen days, file and serve on the respondent draft minutes of orders to give effect to these reasons.' 'Order for previous security for costs vacated conditionally upon provision of $25,000 cash...