Frigger v Trenfield

The Friggers have brought an application against the Trustees of the estate of Mr Trenfield, deceased, in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute revolves around the ownership of a portfolio of shares held with CommSec and whether they were properly transferred to the estate. The Friggers claim that the shares were held on trust for the Family Superannuation Fund (FSF), which was established by the Friggers. They seek mandatory interlocutory injunctions against the Trustees to prevent the sale of the shares and for the Trustees to make good any losses incurred. The Trustees argue that the shares were not properly transferred to the estate and seek to sell them to benefit the creditors of the estate.

The court was required to decide whether the Friggers had established a serious question to be tried, whether there were evidentiary uncertainties that made it difficult to determine the outcome, and whether the balance of convenience favoured the granting of the interlocutory injunctions. The court also had to consider whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the Friggers.

The court found that the Friggers had not established a serious question to be tried as there were significant evidentiary uncertainties. The court noted that the Friggers had made broad assertions without providing sufficient evidence to support their claims. The court also found that the balance of convenience did not favour the granting of the interlocutory injunctions as it would result in potential loss to the creditors of the estate if the shares did not vest in the Trustees. The court held that damages would likely provide an adequate remedy for the Friggers.

The court dismissed the Friggers' application for interlocutory injunctions and reserved costs. The Friggers have the option to pursue the same orders as final relief.