Jess & Jess (No 4)

In the case of Jess & Jess (No 4), the court addressed the application of the wife, the husband’s personal representative, and the trustees to set aside orders made by Cronin J on 24 September 2009. The respondents, including Mr Jess Jnr and the represented third parties, contested the application, leading to a complex litigation scenario that had been ongoing for a significant period. The court was required to determine whether the orders could be set aside under section 79A(1A) of the relevant act and whether Mr Jess Jnr had a relevant interest to oppose the application. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether a case of miscarriage of justice had been made out under section 79A(1)(a) due to fraud.

The court found that an order should be made to set aside the orders made by Cronin J, as Mr Jess Jnr did not have a relevant interest to oppose the application. The court held that Mr Jess Jnr was not a party to the orders made by Cronin J and, therefore, had no standing to oppose the application. Furthermore, the court noted that there was no mandatory requirement compelling a s 79A application to be dealt with concurrently with the s 79 proceeding. The court also found that while an arguable case of miscarriage of justice had been made out, the represented third parties had not sought an order in relation to their interests. As such, the court concluded that setting aside the orders was appropriate.

The final orders of the court were that the orders made by Cronin J on 24 September 2009 were set aside, and Mr Jess Jnr and the represented third parties were to have the opportunity to put their case in a subsequent s 79 proceeding. The court emphasised that the represented third parties had not sought an order to protect their interests, which further supported the decision to set aside the orders. This ruling ensures that the application is dealt with expeditiously, in line with the principles governing the Major Complex Financial Proceedings List.