ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD -v- THE MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT [2016] WASCA 110

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2016] WASCA 110
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:16/2016	Heard:	7 JUNE 2016
Coram:	BUSS JA NEWNES JA	Delivered:	1/07/16
No of pages:	11	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Applications dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD (ACN 062 212 140) THE MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT REGULATION
Catchwords:	Practice and procedure Applications for orders suspending enforcement of judgments Whether threat of winding up proceedings by judgment creditor sufficient to justify suspension orders Whether balance of convenience favoured suspension orders
Legislation:	Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA), s 15
Case References:	Bresam Investments Pty Ltd v Shmee Pty Ltd [2008] VSCA 251 Cook's Construction Pty Ltd v Stork Food Systems Australasia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 322; [2008] 2 Qd R 453 Eastland Technology Australia Pty Ltd v Whisson [2003] WASCA 307; (2003) 28 WAR 308 Ladang Jalong (Australia) Pty Ltd v Callander [2005] WASCA 203 Tradesman Technologies Pty Ltd v Ameduri [2012] WASCA 168

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD -v- THE MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT [2016] WASCA 110 CORAM : BUSS JA

NEWNES JA

HEARD : 7 JUNE 2016 DELIVERED : 1 JULY 2016 FILE NO/S : CACV 16 of 2016 BETWEEN : ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD (ACN 062 212 140)

Appellant

AND

THE MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT

Respondent

FILE NO/S : CACV 18 of 2016 BETWEEN : ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD (ACN 062 212 140)

Appellant

AND

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

First Respondent

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT REGULATION

Second Respondent

THE MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT

Third Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

For File No : CACV 16 of 2016

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : BEECH J

Citation : ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [No 4] [2016] WASC 62

File No : CIV 2385 of 2013

For File No : CACV 18 of 2016

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : BEECH J

Citation : ECLIPSE RESOURCES PTY LTD -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [No 4] [2016] WASC 62

File No : CIV 1364 of 2009

Catchwords:

Practice and procedure - Applications for orders suspending enforcement of judgments - Whether threat of winding up proceedings by judgment creditor sufficient to justify suspension orders - Whether balance of convenience favoured suspension orders

Legislation:

Civil Judgments Enforcement Act 2004 (WA), s 15

Result:

Applications dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

CACV 16 of 2016

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr S Penglis

Respondent : Mr P D Evans & Ms J E Shaw

Solicitors:

Appellant : Fletcher Law

Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia

CACV 18 of 2016

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr S Penglis

First Respondent : Mr P D Evans & Ms…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Eclipse Resources Pty Ltd v The Minister for Environment and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] WASCA 110
Decision Date: 1 JULY 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Eclipse Resources Pty Ltd, sought orders to suspend enforcement of judgments against them. The respondents were the Minister for Environment and the judgment creditor. The dispute was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The applicants argued that the threat of winding up proceedings by the judgment creditor was sufficient to justify the suspension orders, while the respondents argued that the balance of convenience did not favour the suspension of enforcement.

The court had to determine whether the threat of winding up proceedings by the judgment creditor was sufficient to justify the suspension orders, and whether the balance of convenience favoured the suspension orders. The court considered the relevant legal principles and authorities on the matter and concluded that the applicants had not demonstrated a sufficient threat of winding up proceedings to justify the suspension orders. The court also found that the balance of convenience did not favour the suspension of enforcement.

The court dismissed the applications for orders suspending enforcement of judgments. The court held that the applicants had not satisfied the threshold requirements for granting such orders, and that the balance of convenience did not favour the suspension of enforcement. The court emphasised that the burden of proof was on the applicants to demonstrate that the orders were justified.

Orders

Orders of the court

Applications dismissed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.