Stirling Resources Nl v Capital Energy Nl

Stirling Resources NL brought an application for an interlocutory injunction against Capital Energy NL, seeking to restrain the latter from distributing a Part A Statement and making offers to acquire shares in Stirling. Stirling contended that the Part A Statement and offer were deficient in several respects and thus inadequate for shareholders to make an informed decision. The court was required to determine whether there was an arguable issue to be tried, and if so, where the balance of convenience lay. The court found that while there were some deficiencies in the Part A Statement, they were not of a sufficiently clear and serious kind to warrant the granting of interlocutory relief. Specifically, the court held that the consideration for the acquisition of "foreign" shares was not cash but script, and thus there was no breach of cl11(b) of s750. The court also found that the failure to provide information about the effect of the offer on Capital did not require the granting of an interlocutory injunction. The court further held that the balance of convenience favoured an interlocutory injunction restraining the offers being sent until a final hearing of the matter, which could be achieved within a few weeks. The court declined to refuse relief as a discretionary matter, despite the delay in Stirling bringing the application.

The court granted the interlocutory injunction restraining Capital from distributing the Part A Statement and making offers to acquire shares in Stirling until a final hearing of the matter, which could be achieved within a few weeks. The ex parte injunctions originally granted by Finn J were continued until further order.