FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Smartec Capital Pty Limited v Centro Properties Limited [2011] FCA 716
Citation: Smartec Capital Pty Ltd v Centro Properties Limited [2011] FCA 716 Parties: SMARTEC CAPITAL PTY LIMITED v CENTRO PROPERTIES LIMITED ACN 078 590 682 and CPT MANAGER LIMITEDACN 054 494 307 File number: NSD 913 of 2011 Judge: STONE J Date of judgment: 21 June 2011 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for expedition of proceeding brought pursuant to s 793C and s 1101B Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) for enforcement of ASX Listing Rule – factors relevant to granting expedition – whether prima facie case made out –whether proceeding properly constituted – whether necessary parties joined – joinder of some parties would require service outside jurisdiction – applicant expressed no intention to join additional parties – non-joinder of necessary parties insuperable obstacle to expedition
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application under s 31A(2) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for summary dismissal of proceeding – applicant bears onus of proof – consideration of principles governing Court’s discretion – whether proceeding has reasonable prospects of success – no reasonable prospects of success where materially relevant parties not joined and applicant has no intention to do so
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31A(2) Cases cited: Adnunat Pty Ltd v ITW Construction Systems Australia Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 499
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Hua Wang Bank Berhad (No 2) [2010] FCA 1296
John Alexander’s Clubs Pty Limited v White City Tennis Club Limited (2010) 241 CLR 1
Smartec Capital Pty Limited v Centro Properties Limited [2011] NSWSC 495Date of hearing: 21 June 2011 Place: Sydney Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 19 Counsel for the Plaintiff: J Stoljar SC with N Bender Solicitor for the Plaintiff: Atanaskovic Hartnell Counsel for the Defendants: IM Jackman SC with P Flynn Solicitor for the Defendants: Freehills
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 913 of 2011
BETWEEN: SMARTEC CAPITAL PTY LIMITED
PlaintiffAND: CENTRO PROPERTIES LIMITED ACN 078 590 682
First DefendantCPT MANAGER LIMITED ACN 054 494 307
Second Defendant
JUDGE:
STONE J
DATE OF ORDER:
21 JUNE 2011
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) the proceeding be dismissed.
2.The plaintiff pay the defendants’ costs.
3.The defendants’ costs incurred after 5 pm on 17 June 2011 be paid on an indemnity basis.
Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
NSD 913 of 2011
BETWEEN: SMARTEC CAPITAL PTY LIMITED
PlaintiffAND: CENTRO PROPERTIES LIMITED ACN 078 590 682
First DefendantCPT MANAGER LIMITED ACN 054 494 307
Second Defendant
JUDGE:
STONE J
DATE:
21 JUNE 2011
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Smartec Capital Pty Ltd v Centro Properties Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2011] FCA 716
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were multifaceted. Firstly, the court had to determine whether Smartec had made out a prima facie case that warranted expediting the proceeding. Secondly, the court assessed whether all necessary parties had been joined, and if not, whether their non-participation constituted an insurmountable barrier to the expedition of the proceeding. The court also considered the principles governing the exercise of its discretion under section 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) when deciding on the application for summary dismissal. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the proceeding had reasonable prospects of success in the absence of certain parties.
The court found that Smartec had not established a prima facie case that justified the expediting of the proceeding. Moreover, the court observed that not all necessary parties had been joined, and the absence of some parties created a significant obstacle to the proceeding's expedition. Furthermore, the court noted that Smartec had expressed no intention to join additional parties. Consequently, the court concluded that the proceeding did not have reasonable prospects of success due to the non-joinder of materially relevant parties and Smartec's lack of intention to join them. Pursuant to section 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the court dismissed the proceeding. Additionally, the court ordered Smartec to pay Centro's costs and that the costs incurred by Centro after a specified time be paid on an indemnity basis.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Pursuant to s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) the proceeding be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff pay the defendants’ costs.
3. The defendants’ costs incurred after 5 pm on 17 June 2011 be paid on an indemnity basis.
Note:
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.