Rook Cmit Pty Limited v Phuoc Trieu

In the matter of Rook Cmit Pty Limited, the plaintiff, and Phuoc Trieu, the defendant, the Federal Court of Australia was presented with an interlocutory application filed ex parte by the plaintiff. The plaintiff sought an interlocutory injunction to prevent the defendant from disposing of certain assets. The primary dispute centred around the defendant's alleged mismanagement of funds and assets, which the plaintiff claimed were entrusted to him for business purposes.

The court was required to determine whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted without prior notice to the defendant. This involved assessing the urgency of the application, the likelihood of success on the merits, and the balance of convenience. Specifically, the court needed to weigh the potential harm to the plaintiff if the injunction was not granted against any prejudice that might be caused to the defendant by an ex parte application.

The court found that the circumstances presented a clear case of urgency, given the risk of asset dissipation. It was established that the defendant had previously acted in breach of fiduciary duties, and the plaintiff had a strong likelihood of success on the merits. Furthermore, the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff, as the potential loss to the plaintiff outweighed any prejudice to the defendant. Consequently, the court granted the injunction ex parte, considering the compelling nature of the plaintiff's case and the immediacy of the threat posed by the defendant's actions.