BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd v PT Bayan Resources TBK (No 3)

The dispute in this case concerns the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Western Australia to make freezing orders to aid proceedings on a cause of action being tried in a foreign court. The plaintiff, BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd, sought a declaration that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to make such orders, while also applying for freezing orders against two defendants, PT Bayan Resources TBK and Kangaroo Resources Ltd. The defendants contested the jurisdictional claims and opposed the freezing orders. The legal issues before the court involved interpreting various provisions of the Supreme Court Rules 1971 (WA) and 1935 (WA) and the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth), as well as assessing the relationship between the requirement for a good arguable case and the prospect of enforcement of a foreign judgment.

The court examined whether Rule 5(1)(b)(ii) of the Supreme Court Rules 1971 (WA) was authorised by the Supreme Court Rules 1935 (WA) and whether it was within the inherent jurisdiction of the court. The court found that the rule was indeed authorised and that the court's inherent jurisdiction extended to making freezing orders in aid of proceedings on a cause of action being tried in a foreign court. The court also concluded that Rule 5(1)(b)(ii) was not inconsistent with the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) or the Australian Constitution. Furthermore, the court held that there was a good arguable case and a sufficient prospect that another court would give judgment, and that that judgment would be registered and enforced by the court, despite the risk that the prospective judgment might remain unsatisfied.

In light of the above findings, the court dismissed the application for a declaration that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction or power to make freezing orders. It granted the application for freezing orders against PT Bayan Resources TBK, finding that there was a good arguable case and a sufficient prospect of enforcement. However, the application for freezing orders against Kangaroo Resources Ltd was dismissed due to insufficient evidence of a connection between the company and the underlying cause of action. The final orders of the court were to dismiss the application for a declaration of lack of jurisdiction, grant the freezing orders against PT Bayan Resources TBK, and dismiss the application for freezing orders against Kangaroo Resources Ltd.