Re Quirky Mama Productions Pty Ltd

The respondents, Quirky Mama Productions Pty Ltd, brought an action against the applicants, a group of individuals, in the County Court of Victoria. The respondents sought to recover unpaid invoices and other associated costs. The applicants, in turn, applied to transfer the matter to the Supreme Court of Queensland, citing relevant provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Vic). The applicants contended that the transfer was warranted due to the significant connection of the events, law, and conduct of the defendants to Queensland.

The court had to determine whether the application to transfer the proceedings to the Supreme Court of Queensland was appropriate under the cited sections of the relevant Acts. In particular, the court considered the interests of justice and the factors outlined in the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Vic). The court examined the geographical relevance of the events in question, the law governing the transaction, the conduct of the defendants, the location of the defendants and the company’s principal place of business, and the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on in-person court hearings. Given the strong connections to Queensland, the court found that the transfer was in the interests of justice.

All parties consented to the transfer, and the court accepted that the matter should proceed in Queensland. The court found that the interests of justice were best served by transferring the case to the Supreme Court of Queensland, where the events occurred, and the law governing the transaction is applicable. The court emphasised the significant connections to Queensland, including the conduct of the defendants and their location, as well as the company’s principal place of business. The impact of COVID-19 restrictions on in-person court hearings was also considered.

The court ordered the transfer of the proceeding to the Supreme Court of Queensland. The County Court of Victoria dismissed the application for an extension of time to file an amended defence and struck out the existing defence. The respondents were granted leave to amend their statement of claim, with the deadline for filing the amended statement of claim set as 14 days from the date of the order.