In the matter of SBL Solutions Pty Ltd (subject to a deed of company arrangement) [2021] NSWSC 1003

In the matter of SBL Solutions Pty Ltd (subject to a deed of company arrangement) [2021] NSWSC 1003

Leave to reopen was declined because the plaintiffs' offer to fund a liquidator was a change of position arising only after judgment was reserved, not a previously existing state of facts; allowing reopening on this basis would undermine orderly procedure, prejudice the defendants, and the plaintiffs provided no evidence of their financial capacity to perform the funding offer, so the proposed evidence could not reliably affect the substantive outcome.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Reopen After Judgment Reserved
Outcome
Application for leave to reopen dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Reopen Case' 'adducing New Evidence' "indemnity for Liquidator's Costs" 'costs of Proceedings']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations Law'] ['leave to Reopen Case' 'adducing New Evidence' "indemnity for Liquidator's Costs" 'costs of Proceedings']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Reopen After Judgment Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to reopen case to lead new evidence regarding indemnity for liquidator's costs and costs of proceedings" "Whether plaintiffs' changed position after judgment reserved justifies reopening the case"]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to reopen was declined because the plaintiffs' offer to fund a liquidator was a change of position arising only after judgment was reserved, not a previously existing state of facts; allowing reopening on this basis would undermine orderly procedure, prejudice the defendants, and the plaintiffs provided no evidence of their financial capacity to perform the funding offer, so the proposed evidence could not reliably affect the substantive outcome.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to reopen dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Leave to reopen case is declined.' "Plaintiffs to pay Defendants' costs of application."]