Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (In Liq); Lamru Pty Ltd v Kation Pty Ltd

The case of Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (In Liq); Lamru Pty Ltd v Kation Pty Ltd was heard before the court, involving Lewis, a plaintiff seeking to preserve assets, and Nortex Pty Ltd, a liquidated company, with Lamru Pty Ltd and Kation Pty Ltd as additional parties in a complex dispute over property rights. The central issue was whether an interlocutory injunction, specifically a Mareva injunction, should be granted to preserve the assets of the defendants to ensure they were available to satisfy any potential judgment in Lewis's favour.

The court needed to determine whether the criteria for granting a Mareva injunction were met. This required an assessment of whether Lewis had a serious question to be tried, a good arguable case, and that the assets were at risk of dissipation. Additionally, the court had to consider the balance of convenience, weighing the potential harm to the defendants against the need to preserve the assets for the plaintiff.

The court found that the plaintiff had demonstrated a serious question to be tried and a good arguable case, given the substantial claims and the risk of asset dissipation. The balance of convenience favoured the grant of the injunction, as the plaintiff's need to secure the assets pending resolution of the litigation outweighed any inconvenience to the defendants. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the plaintiff, granting the Mareva injunction to preserve the defendants' assets to ensure they remained available to satisfy any judgment in the plaintiff's favour.