Luu v 888 Links Group Pty Ltd and 888 Management Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 1018

Luu v 888 Links Group Pty Ltd and 888 Management Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 1018

The plaintiff acted unreasonably by pressing the interlocutory applications for appointment of a provisional liquidator after rejecting undertakings that would have preserved the companies' affairs pending final hearing, and then consenting to dismissal on the basis of substantially the same undertakings; accordingly the interlocutory processes should be dismissed with costs against the plaintiff.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Originating Processes Seeking Winding Up Orders, With Interlocutory Processes Seeking Appointment of a Provisional Liquidator / Interlocutory Applications Dismissed by Consent; Costs Determined
Outcome
Applications for appointment of provisional liquidator dismissed by consent; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs of those applications.
Legal Topics
['winding Up' 'appointment of Provisional Liquidator' 'costs' 'undertakings' 'preservation of Status Quo Pending Final Hearing']
['corporations Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['winding Up' 'appointment of Provisional Liquidator' 'costs' 'undertakings' 'preservation of Status Quo Pending Final Hearing']

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

Procedural Posture

Originating Processes Seeking Winding Up Orders, With Interlocutory Processes Seeking Appointment of a Provisional Liquidator / Interlocutory Applications Dismissed by Consent; Costs Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff should pay the defendants' costs of the interlocutory applications after consenting to their dismissal upon undertakings." 'Whether the applications for appointment of a provisional liquidator should have been pursued where undertakings preserving the status quo had been offered before the hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff acted unreasonably by pressing the interlocutory applications for appointment of a provisional liquidator after rejecting undertakings that would have preserved the companies' affairs pending final hearing, and then consenting to dismissal on the basis of substantially the same undertakings; accordingly the interlocutory processes should be dismissed with costs against the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Applications for appointment of provisional liquidator dismissed by consent; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs of those applications.

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory process in each case was dismissed with costs.' 'The Court noted the undertakings given by the second and third defendants in each proceeding as set out in the short minutes of order.' 'In proceeding 5142/05, order 2 in the short minutes was made.' 'In proceeding 5141/05, orders 2 and 3 in the...