Mulhern v Bank of Queensland

The case of Mulhern v Bank of Queensland involved an application by the Bank of Queensland for summary judgment against the plaintiffs, who sought relief including declarations, monetary relief, damages for breach of contract, and damages for various alleged losses. The dispute arose from the Bank's appointment of receivers and managers to the companies comprising the Mulhern Group, and the obtaining of freezing orders in respect of funds in Mrs Mulhern's bank account. The plaintiffs argued that the Bank was not entitled to the orders, and that the Bank overcharged interest. The primary issue before the court was whether the plaintiffs had any reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding, given that some of the plaintiffs were bankrupt, and whether any reasonable cause of action had been disclosed.

The court held that the plaintiffs, apart from Mr and Mrs Mulhern, had not identified any real issue of fact or law to be decided as between themselves and the Bank. There was no evidence that would support a conclusion that there may be any real issue of fact or law to be decided as between any of the plaintiffs and the Bank. The proceedings were partly dismissed as an abuse of process, as they were a collateral attack upon a final decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland. The court found that Mr Mulhern and Mrs Mulhern did not have standing to bring claims to the extent that those claims had vested in their respective trustees in bankruptcy. The court struck out the statement of claim in its entirety, gave judgment for the defendant against the plaintiffs, and stayed the proceedings brought by the second and eleventh plaintiffs until the conclusion of their bankruptcy or further order.

In summary, the court held that the plaintiffs had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding, and that the proceedings were an abuse of process. The statement of claim was struck out, judgment was given for the defendant against the plaintiffs, and the proceedings were stayed until the conclusion of the second and eleventh plaintiffs' bankruptcy or further order.