Keynes Capital Global Limited v Guo - [2020] NSWCA 178

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Keynes Capital Global Limited v Guo [2020] NSWCA 178
Hearing dates: 17 August 2020
Date of orders: 18 August 2020
Decision date: 18 August 2020
Before: Bell P at [1]; Meagher JA at [27]; Payne JA at [28]
Decision:
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs

Catchwords:
APPEAL – Practice and procedure – freezing orders – discovery – whether primary judge erred in ordering discovery of documents in context of a challenge to freezing order originally made in aid of proceedings to be commenced in Hong Kong – where proceedings subsequently commenced in Hong Kong – where freezing order extended by consent but subsequent application to vacate freezing order – whether any error of principle in ordering discovery.
CIVIL PROCEDURE – Application for leave to appeal – where grant of leave would lack utility – where primary judge did not err in discretionary decision relating to question of practice and procedure – where no issue of error or principle.
CIVIL PROCEDURE – Freezing orders – whether discovery appropriately ordered in context of challenge to freezing orders originally obtained ex parte but subsequently extended by consent.

Legislation Cited:
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 25.14(3)

Cases Cited:
Davis v Turning Properties Pty Ltd (2005) 222 ALR 676; [2005] NSWSC 742
House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
PA Putney Finance Pty Limited v Aalders [2020] NSWSC 305
PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48
PT Bayan Resources TBK v BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd (2015) 258 CLR 1; [2015] HCA 36
Resort Hotels Management Pty Ltd v Resort Hotels of Australia Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 730
Severstal Export GmbH v Bhushan Steel Ltd (2013) 84 NSWLR 141; [2013] NSWCA 102
Suzhou Haishun Investment Management Co Ltd v Yue’e Zhao (Ruling No 2) [2018] VSC 144

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Keynes Capital Global Limited (First Applicant)
General Energy International Holdings Limited (Second Applicant)
Hui Guo (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
P D Crutchfield QC, E Bathurst (Applicants)
E A J Hyde (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Maddocks Lawyers (Applicants)
King & Wood Mallesons (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2020/00123274
Publication restriction: N/A
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Equity

Citation:

[2020] NSWSC 337

Date of Decision:

1 April 2020

Before:

Ball J

File Number(s):

2018/309560

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

On 1 April 2020, orders were made in the Supreme Court of New South Wales requiring Keynes Capital Global Limited and General Energy International Holdings Limited (the Applicants) to give discovery of certain documents in proceedings in which Ms Hui Guo (the Respondent) had sought and obtained a freezing order in aid of proceedings in Hong Kong against the Applicants (the Hong Kong Proceedings).

The freezing order which had originally been made on an ex parte basis was extended by consent until the final…

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 Keynes Capital Global Limited v Guo 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: [2020] NSWCA 178
Decision Date: 18 August 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Keynes Capital Global Limited (the appellant) sought leave to appeal from a decision of the primary judge who had ordered discovery of documents in support of an application to vacate a freezing order. The freezing order had originally been made ex parte in aid of proceedings to be commenced in Hong Kong, which were subsequently commenced. The freezing order was extended by consent, but the appellant then applied to have it vacated.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge erred in principle or discretion by ordering discovery in the context of the challenge to the freezing order. The appellant contended that such discovery was inappropriate.

The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge had not erred in principle or discretion. The Court found that the grant of leave to appeal would lack utility, as there was no demonstrable error in the primary judge's discretionary decision concerning a question of practice and procedure. The Court concluded that the discovery order was appropriately made in the circumstances of the application to vacate the freezing order.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Keynes Capital Global Limited v Guo [2020] NSWCA 178
Hearing dates:	17 August 2020
Date of orders:	18 August 2020
Decision date:	18 August 2020
Before:	Bell P at [1]; Meagher JA at [27]; Payne JA at [28]
Decision:	Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs
Catchwords:	APPEAL – Practice and procedure – freezing orders – discovery – whether primary judge erred in ordering discovery of documents in context of a challenge to freezing order originally made in aid of proceedings to be commenced in Hong Kong – where proceedings subsequently commenced in Hong Kong – where freezing order extended by consent but subsequent application to vacate freezing order – whether any error of principle in ordering discovery. CIVIL PROCEDURE – Application for leave to appeal – where grant of leave would lack utility – where primary judge did not err in discretionary decision relating to question of practice and procedure – where no issue of error or principle. CIVIL PROCEDURE – Freezing orders – whether discovery appropriately ordered in context of challenge to freezing orders originally obtained ex parte but subsequently extended by consent.
Legislation Cited:	Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 25.14(3)
Cases Cited:	Davis v Turning Properties Pty Ltd (2005) 222 ALR 676; [2005] NSWSC 742 House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 PA Putney Finance Pty Limited v Aalders [2020] NSWSC 305 PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 PT Bayan Resources TBK v BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd (2015) 258 CLR 1; [2015] HCA 36 Resort Hotels Management Pty Ltd v Resort Hotels of Australia Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 730 Severstal Export GmbH v Bhushan Steel Ltd (2013) 84 NSWLR 141; [2013] NSWCA 102 Suzhou Haishun Investment Management Co Ltd v Yue’e Zhao (Ruling No 2) [2018] VSC 144
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Keynes Capital Global Limited (First Applicant) General Energy International Holdings Limited (Second Applicant) Hui Guo (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: P D Crutchfield QC, E Bathurst (Applicants) E A J Hyde (Respondent) Solicitors: Maddocks Lawyers (Applicants) King & Wood Mallesons (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2020/00123274
Publication restriction:	N/A
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court of New South Wales Jurisdiction: Equity Citation: [2020] NSWSC 337 Date of Decision: 1 April 2020 Before: Ball J File Number(s): 2018/309560