Southern Cross Airlines Holdings Ltd v Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm) & Ors [1998] FCA 477

Southern Cross Airlines Holdings Ltd v Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm) & Ors [1998] FCA 477

Where no prima facie case for relief exists, the court may set aside the originating process and joinder of parties under O 9 r 7 of the Federal Court Rules, even if prior leave was granted under O 5 r 8 or O 8 r 2, and the cross-respondents ought not be kept joined when no entitlement to relief is substantiated.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Southern Cross Airlines Holdings Limited; First Respondent: Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm); Second Respondent: Sir Leo Hielscher; Third Respondent: Brian Harvey Baden Powell; Fourth Respondent: Leonard Thomas George Heard; Fifth Respondent: Dame Margaret Georgina Constance Guilfoyle; Sixth Respondent: Leigh Masel; Seventh Respondent: David Samuel Coats; Eight Respondent: James Graham Ambrose Tucker; Ninth Respondent: Geoffrey Arthur Cohen; Cross Claimant: Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm); First Cross Respondent: Sir Leo Hielscher; Second Cross Respondent: Brian Harvey Baden Powell; Third Cross Respondent: Leonard Thomas George Heard; Fourth Cross Respondent: Dame Margaret Georgina Constance Guilfoyle; Fifth Cross Respondent: Leigh Masel; Sixth Cross Respondent: David Samuel Coats; Seventh Cross Respondent: James Graham Ambrose Tucker; Eighth Cross Respondent: Westpac Banking Corporation; Ninth Cross Respondent: Gledhill Burridge & Cathro; Tenth Cross Respondent: The Apogee Finance Group Inc; Eleventh Cross Respondent: GPA Group PLC; Twelfth Cross Respondent: Tyrolean Limited; Thirteenth Cross Respondent: Irish Aerospace Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 1998
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Service of Cross Claim / Judgment and Orders on Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Service, Prima Facie Case Requirement, Service Outside Australia, Cross Claim Procedure
Practice and Procedure Setting Aside Service Prima Facie Case Requirement Service Outside Australia Cross Claim Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Southern Cross Airlines Holdings Limited

Applicant

Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm)

First Respondent

Sir Leo Hielscher

Second Respondent

Brian Harvey Baden Powell

Third Respondent

Leonard Thomas George Heard

Fourth Respondent

Dame Margaret Georgina Constance Guilfoyle

Fifth Respondent

Leigh Masel

Sixth Respondent

David Samuel Coats

Seventh Respondent

James Graham Ambrose Tucker

Eight Respondent

Geoffrey Arthur Cohen

Ninth Respondent

Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm)

Cross Claimant

Sir Leo Hielscher

First Cross Respondent

Brian Harvey Baden Powell

Second Cross Respondent

Leonard Thomas George Heard

Third Cross Respondent

Dame Margaret Georgina Constance Guilfoyle

Fourth Cross Respondent

Leigh Masel

Fifth Cross Respondent

David Samuel Coats

Sixth Cross Respondent

James Graham Ambrose Tucker

Seventh Cross Respondent

Westpac Banking Corporation

Eighth Cross Respondent

Gledhill Burridge & Cathro

Ninth Cross Respondent

The Apogee Finance Group Inc

Tenth Cross Respondent

GPA Group PLC

Eleventh Cross Respondent

Tyrolean Limited

Twelfth Cross Respondent

Irish Aerospace Limited

Thirteenth Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Service of Cross Claim / Judgment and Orders on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the finding of no prima facie right to relief entitles respondents to an order setting aside the originating process
  2. 2 Application of Federal Court Rules to setting aside cross-claim and service outside Australia

Ratio Decidendi

Where no prima facie case for relief exists, the court may set aside the originating process and joinder of parties under O 9 r 7 of the Federal Court Rules, even if prior leave was granted under O 5 r 8 or O 8 r 2, and the cross-respondents ought not be kept joined when no entitlement to relief is substantiated.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Service of the cross-claim of Arthur Andersen & Co on eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth cross-respondents set aside (previous order).