1 Mar 2018
The summary judgment application is dismissed because there are material disputes of fact about whether an oral agreement was formed on 25 May 2016 which cannot be resolved on the affidavit evidence; discovery is incomplete and trial examination is required to test contested matters.
28 Oct 2016
The 7 April 2011 document was intended to be contractually binding and sufficiently certain; its terms, read with accepted oral variations and the bespoke schedule, show the $380,000 consideration was to be met by plaintiff providing funds into the companies to pay company debts (capped by the itemised liabilities), with $80,000 of the loan balance being applied as part of that consideration; parties agreed plaintiff would receive 50% of shares (not 33%); on the evidence plaintiff is not entitled to an order to transfer an additional 50% back to him; defendant did not establish forgery of his…
17 Jul 2014
The Court refused to vacate the 20 October 2014 fixture; ordered the plaintiffs to produce numbered copies of the documents they conceded immediately (or by end of next business day) and to file and serve within two weeks a supplementary list deposing to completeness and a schedule of produced documents; limited particular discovery of plaintiffs' and their trust's financial documents to the period up to 2 September 2013 (including any documents between 30 August and 2 September), and declined defendants' request for further discovery through October 2013; declined to order security for costs…
21 Oct 2011
The Court held the transaction was a sale of shares, not a supply of a going concern: the legal rights and obligations arose from the share transfer and company constitution (including surrender of the lease), there was no evidence that chattels/partitions/tenancies were assigned or had value attributable to the sale, and Marac and Gulf Harbour require characterisation by the legal arrangements actually entered into, so s 11(1)(m) did not apply.