Gillespie v Gillespie [2025] NSWCA 24

Gillespie v Gillespie [2025] NSWCA 24

The applicant, Robert Gillespie, failed to satisfy the Court that he was acting in good faith in seeking to bring derivative proceedings on behalf of GCN. Although he knew of the material facts at the time of the impugned transaction, he delayed for many years and only commenced proceedings once learning of possible sale proceeds, giving no adequate explanation for earlier delay. There was no connection between his ceased directorship and the relief sought, and his interests aligned with those of a trust beneficiary, not the company. Therefore, the statutory requirement of good faith in s 237(2)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) was not satisfied; the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Robert Gillespie; First Respondent: Peter Timothy Gillespie; Second Respondent: Helen Ann Gillespie (as personal representative of the Estate of the Late John William Gillespie); Third Respondent: JPD Equipment Pty Limited; Fourth Respondent: Ainley Pty Limited; Fifth Respondent: Gillespies Cranes Nominees Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal And, If Granted, Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Leave to Bring Statutory Derivative Action
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Derivative Actions, Good Faith Requirement, Appellate Review Standard
Corporations Law Statutory Derivative Actions Good Faith Requirement Appellate Review Standard

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Gillespie

Appellant

Peter Timothy Gillespie

First Respondent

Helen Ann Gillespie (as personal representative of the Estate of the Late John William Gillespie)

Second Respondent

JPD Equipment Pty Limited

Third Respondent

Ainley Pty Limited

Fourth Respondent

Gillespies Cranes Nominees Pty Ltd

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal And, If Granted, Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Leave to Bring Statutory Derivative Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is acting in good faith in seeking leave to bring statutory derivative proceedings on behalf of a company under s 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the purpose for which the application is brought is to vindicate the company's rights or merely the applicant’s personal interests as a trust beneficiary
  3. 3 Relevance of delay and connection to the company/directorship in determining good faith

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant, Robert Gillespie, failed to satisfy the Court that he was acting in good faith in seeking to bring derivative proceedings on behalf of GCN. Although he knew of the material facts at the time of the impugned transaction, he delayed for many years and only commenced proceedings once learning of possible sale proceeds, giving no adequate explanation for earlier delay. There was no connection between his ceased directorship and the relief sought, and his interests aligned with those of a trust beneficiary, not the company. Therefore, the statutory requirement of good faith in s 237(2)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) was not satisfied; the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal.
  • Appellant to file a notice of appeal in the form contained in the White Book within 7 days.