Hillier v Martin (No 12)

In Hillier v Martin (No 12), the Federal Court was asked to decide several interlocutory applications made by Mr Hillier against Mrs Martin and Nordburger Operations Pty Ltd in the course of an ongoing dispute concerning the ownership of a hamburger restaurant business trading as Nordburger. The court had to determine whether Mr Hillier was entitled to an order restraining the respondents from making payments to Mrs Martin or her associates, as well as whether Mrs Martin should be compelled to depose to affidavits providing information. The court also needed to consider the purpose of the power conferred by the relevant Federal Court Rules and the danger to which the proposed orders were directed.

The court held that Mr Hillier was entitled to the Broader Restraint order, irrespective of whether the Undertaking given by the respondents was in force. The court identified the relevant danger to which the proposed order was directed and found that the relief sought in the interlocutory application did not depend on the Court being positively satisfied as to whether or not the Undertaking had been breached. However, the court dismissed Mr Hillier's application for an order requiring Mrs Martin to disclose her personal assets, as there was insufficient evidence to justify such an order. The court also held that the information orders sought by Mr Hillier were not ancillary to actual or prospective relief under the relevant Federal Court Rules.

In summary, the court allowed Mr Hillier's application for a Broader Restraint order, subject to certain conditions, but dismissed his application for an order requiring Mrs Martin to disclose her personal assets and other information orders. The court also extended the time for seeking leave to appeal from these orders.