Thompson Brindal Ltd v McLachlan, Hamish Boyd [1997] FCA 675

Thompson Brindal Ltd v McLachlan, Hamish Boyd [1997] FCA 675

Applicant established prima facie cause of action, but did not demonstrate to the required degree of satisfaction that there is a real danger respondent will dispose of assets to frustrate any judgment; application refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 July 1997
Procedural Posture
Application for Mareva Order (interlocutory Injunction) / Inter Partes Hearing of Interlocutory Relief
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['mareva Injunction' 'interlocutory Relief' 'injunctions']
['civil Procedure'] ['mareva Injunction' 'interlocutory Relief' 'injunctions']

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

Application for Mareva Order (interlocutory Injunction) / Inter Partes Hearing of Interlocutory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether applicant is entitled to Mareva order against respondent' 'Whether applicant shows prima facie cause of action' "Whether there is a real danger of respondent's assets being disposed of, removed or put beyond reach"]

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant established prima facie cause of action, but did not demonstrate to the required degree of satisfaction that there is a real danger respondent will dispose of assets to frustrate any judgment; application refused.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['Interim injunction to lapse at 5:00 p.m. on the date of judgment' "Applicant to pay respondent's costs of the interlocutory relief application dated 30 June 1997"]