Coshott v Coshott (No 2)

In this matter, the parties involved were the applicants, first respondent, second respondent, first cross respondent, and a cross claimant. The dispute arose from a property settlement and involved the registration of a company, Schlotzsky’s Nominee Company Pty Limited, as well as various claims and counterclaims. The case was heard by the Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues that the court had to decide included the reinstatement of the company’s registration, the allowance of the cross claimant to join as a fourth cross respondent, the amendment of the first cross claim, the allocation of costs, and the scheduling of document inspections, witness statements, and directions for the trial. The court also needed to address the service of defences and the stand over of directions for the trial.

In delivering the judgment, the court addressed each of these issues methodically. Firstly, the court reinstated the registration of Schlotzsky’s Nominee Company Pty Limited under section 601AH(2) of the Corporations Act 2001. Secondly, the court granted leave to the cross claimant to join as a fourth cross respondent, requiring the filing and service of an amended first cross claim by a specified date. The court also ordered that the costs of the notice of motion and the amendment be borne by the cross claimant. Additionally, the court set out a timeline for the inspection of discovered documents and the service of defences. Finally, the court scheduled the next directions hearing and outlined the requirements for witness statements and document tendering by the respective parties.