Mao v AMP Superannuation Limited [2017] NSWCA 296

Mao v AMP Superannuation Limited [2017] NSWCA 296

The stay and ancillary document and restraint orders were refused because Ms Mao did not demonstrate any sufficient basis for staying the 26 July 2017 orders or interfering with the NSW Trustee and Guardian's and Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd's conduct of the Equity proceedings. The Equity proceedings were effectively...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in the Court of Appeal for a Stay Pending an Application for Leave to Appeal, and Related Relief Concerning Documents, Information and Tutor Arrangements / Notice of Motion Determined in Part; Balance Remitted to the Equity Division
Outcome
Relief seeking a stay and document/information restraints was dismissed; costs were ordered for the first to fourth respondents; leave to amend and join Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd was granted by consent and the remaining notice of motion was remitted to the Equity Division.
Legal Topics
['stay Pending Application for Leave to Appeal' 'appointment of NSW Trustee and Guardian as Manager and Tutor' 'legal Incapacity' 'access to Proceeding Documents' 'joinder' 'substitution of Tutor']
['civil Procedure' 'protective Proceedings' 'superannuation'] ['stay Pending Application for Leave to Appeal' 'appointment of NSW Trustee and Guardian as Manager and Tutor' 'legal Incapacity' 'access to Proceeding Documents' 'joinder' 'substitution of Tutor']

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

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in the Court of Appeal for a Stay Pending an Application for Leave to Appeal, and Related Relief Concerning Documents, Information and Tutor Arrangements / Notice of Motion Determined in Part; Balance Remitted to the Equity Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether orders made by Ward CJ in Eq on 26 July 2017 appointing the NSW Trustee and Guardian as manager of part of Ms Mao's estate should be stayed pending determination of her application for leave to appeal." 'Whether orders should be made requiring the NSW Trustee and Guardian to provide Ms Mao with copies of documents and prohibiting the NSW Trustee and Guardian and Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd from releasing or using information or documents in the Equity proceedings.' "Whether r 7.14 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) should be dispensed with for Ms Mao's applications brought without a tutor." 'Whether Ms Mao should be granted leave to amend her notice of motion to seek removal of the NSW Trustee and Guardian as tutor, join Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd, and have the remaining claims remitted to the Equity Division.']

Ratio Decidendi

The stay and ancillary document and restraint orders were refused because Ms Mao did not demonstrate any sufficient basis for staying the 26 July 2017 orders or interfering with the NSW Trustee and Guardian's and Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd's conduct of the Equity proceedings. The Equity proceedings were effectively on hold, no particular prejudice to Ms Mao was shown, the filing of the leave application was not enough, the NSW Trustee and Guardian was responsible for managing the proceedings to Ms Mao's best advantage, and it was not shown to be in Ms Mao's interests to receive the voluminous documents or to restrain the NSW Trustee and Guardian or Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd from releasing...

Court Disposition

Relief seeking a stay and document/information restraints was dismissed; costs were ordered for the first to fourth respondents; leave to amend and join Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd was granted by consent and the remaining notice of motion was remitted to the Equity Division.

Orders

  • ["Rule 7.14 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) be dispensed with in relation to the applicant's application for an order in accordance with paragraph 4 of her notice of motion filed on 11 October 2017 and in relation to her notice of motion filed on 24 October 2017." 'The claim for relief in paragraph 4...