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

Lewis brought proceedings against Nortex, a company in liquidation, and Lamru, seeking an interlocutory injunction to preserve Nortex's assets pending the outcome of the case. Lamru, in turn, sought an interlocutory injunction against Kation to prevent it from interfering with Lamru's rights in Nortex's assets. The court had to decide whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted to preserve the assets in question and, if so, the conditions under which it should be granted.

The court considered the well-established criteria for granting a Mareva injunction, which includes demonstrating a good arguable case, a risk of dissipation of assets, and the need for the injunction to preserve the status quo pending the final determination of the case. The court noted that Lewis had established a strong prima facie case and highlighted the potential for dissipation of assets, given the financial circumstances of Nortex and Lamru. The court also emphasised the importance of considering whether the party seeking the injunction had other means to fund the litigation.

Ultimately, the court determined that an interlocutory injunction should be granted to preserve Nortex's assets. However, the court imposed conditions on the injunction, requiring Lewis to provide security for any costs that Lamru or Kation might incur if the injunction was later found to be unjustified. The court also required Lewis to demonstrate that the injunction was necessary and that the funds were not otherwise available to fund the litigation.

The court ordered that an interlocutory injunction be granted to Lewis, subject to the conditions outlined above. The injunction was to be in place until the final determination of the case, or until further order of the court. The court also ordered that Lewis provide security for any costs that Lamru or Kation might incur if the injunction was later found to be unjustified.