Application of the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW) [2020] NSWSC 1212

Application of the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW) [2020] NSWSC 1212

The hearing should be expedited because this is the appropriate court, special factors such as urgency and risk of mootness apply, there was no disentitling delay, and it is not oppressive to affected respondents. Expedition ensures timely assistance to a foreign court and comity.

Parties
Plaintiff: Securities and Exchange Commission; First Respondent: Bradley Twynham; Second Respondent: Marcus Alan Leith Nicholson; Third Respondent: Jon Waldron; Fourth Respondent: Chris Kelada; Fifth Respondent: Tom Richardson; Sixth Respondent: Tom Pennington; Seventh Respondent: Miriam Ingrid Lane; Eighth Respondent: Matthew Smith; Ninth Respondent: Matthew Keaney; Tenth Respondent: Darren Murphy; Eleventh Respondent: Eric Pulier
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Application Under Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (nsw) / Application for Expedition and Costs Directions
Outcome
Application for expedition granted; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Expedition of Hearing, International Evidence, Letters of Request, Costs in the Cause
Civil Procedure Expedition of Hearing International Evidence Letters of Request Costs in the Cause

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Securities and Exchange Commission

Plaintiff

Bradley Twynham

First Respondent

Marcus Alan Leith Nicholson

Second Respondent

Jon Waldron

Third Respondent

Chris Kelada

Fourth Respondent

Tom Richardson

Fifth Respondent

Tom Pennington

Sixth Respondent

Miriam Ingrid Lane

Seventh Respondent

Matthew Smith

Eighth Respondent

Matthew Keaney

Ninth Respondent

Darren Murphy

Tenth Respondent

Eric Pulier

Eleventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (nsw) / Application for Expedition and Costs Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing of the summons should be expedited under s 32 of the Evidence on Commission Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether a delay disentitles the applicant (SEC) from expedition
  3. 3 Whether requiring a respondent to prepare for an expedited hearing while a criminal trial is pending amounts to oppression

Ratio Decidendi

The hearing should be expedited because this is the appropriate court, special factors such as urgency and risk of mootness apply, there was no disentitling delay, and it is not oppressive to affected respondents. Expedition ensures timely assistance to a foreign court and comity.

Court Disposition

Application for expedition granted; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The hearing of the plaintiff's summons filed on 19 August 2020 is to be expedited.
  • The costs of the plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 26 August 2020 are to be each party's costs in the cause.