Hydrocool Pty Limited v Hepburn

[2009] FCA 815

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Hydrocool Pty Limited v Hepburn [2009] FCA 815

HYDROCOOL PTY LIMITED (ACN 067 525 366) v IAIN MACGREGOR HEPBURN, THERMOELECTRIC APPLICATIONS PTY LIMITED (ACN 112 217 124), PETER TERENCE CLARKE, BENJAMIN BANNEY, MONTAG DAVIS, BRETT MANNERS, ROBERT WEYMOUTH, RITA CLARKE, WATER MASTER LIMITED and GARTH CLIFFORD RICHARDSON

NSD 1754 of 2006

SIOPIS J
1 JULY 2009
PERTH

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1754 of 2006

BETWEEN: HYDROCOOL PTY LIMITED (ACN 067 525 366)
Applicant

AND:

IAIN MACGREGOR HEPBURN
First Respondent

THERMOELECTRIC APPLICATIONS PTY LIMITED (ACN 112 217 124)
Second Respondent

PETER TERENCE CLARKE
Third Respondent

BENJAMIN BANNEY
Fourth Respondent

MONTAG DAVIS
Fifth Respondent

BRETT MANNERS
Sixth Respondent

ROBERT WEYMOUTH
Seventh Respondent

RITA CLARKE
Eighth Respondent

WATER MASTER LIMITED
Ninth Respondent

GARTH CLIFFORD RICHARDSON
Tenth Respondent

JUDGE:	SIOPIS J
DATE OF ORDER:	1 JULY 2009
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.By 28 July 2009, a proper officer of the applicant is to file and serve an affidavit:

(a)describing the steps taken by the applicant to establish whether any minutes or notes of the proceedings or meetings of the applicant’s board on 28 October 2004 and 6 December 2004 are or once were in the possession, custody or control of the applicant; and,

(b)giving discovery of any such minutes or notes found to be in the possession, custody or control of the applicant.

2.In respect of any such minutes or notes, which were once but are no longer in the possession, custody or control of the applicant, the affidavit referred to in Order 1 shall describe when each such document was last in the applicant’s possession, custody or control and what has become of each document.

3.The date referred to in Order 1 of the Order made on 23 February 2009 is amended to 15 September 2009.

4.The applicant is to provide to the first, second and third respondents additional security for costs in the sum of $25,000.00 up to entry for trial, by way of bank guarantee or such form of security as is acceptable to the District Registrar.

5.The first, second and third respondents are not to call upon any bank guarantee provided by the applicant to each of those respondents and filed with the Court pursuant to order 4 except if:

(a)14 days have elapsed since any of those respondents has obtained an enforceable order for costs;

(b)the costs order has not been stayed;

(c)the applicant has failed to pay such an enforceable order for costs; and

(d)those costs are for costs incurred by those respondents up to and including the entry of the proceedings for trial.

6.Costs of the first, second and third respondents’ motion, and this directions hearing, are in the cause.

7.The directions hearing is adjourned to 10.15 am on 21 September 2009.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court’s…