Strange v Turnbull; McKenzie v Turnbull

The applicants, Strange and McKenzie, sought an extension of time for the enforcement of freezing orders against the respondent, Turnbull. The applicants alleged that Turnbull had committed fraud and misappropriated funds, and sought to freeze his assets to prevent dissipation. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central legal issues were whether the applicants had established a prima facie case of fraud and whether the applicants had acted with reasonable expedition in seeking the freezing orders.

The court held that the applicants had not demonstrated a reasonable expedition in seeking the freezing orders, as there was a significant delay in filing the application. Despite the applicants' argument that the delay was justified due to the complexity of the case and the need for further investigation, the court found that the applicants had not provided sufficient evidence to support this claim. The court also noted that the applicants had failed to establish a prima facie case of fraud, as the evidence provided was insufficient to support such a conclusion. As a result, the court refused the application for an extension of time for the enforcement of the freezing orders.