Tucker, in the matter of Vector Resources Limited

The case of Tucker, in the matter of Vector Resources Limited, involved an application for leave to serve an originating process outside Australia. The applicants sought to enforce an escrow deed under which they held shares in Vector Resources Limited, a company that had entered voluntary administration. The respondents, Mongbwalu Goldfields Investments Limited, Mongbwalu Goldfields Investments Holdings 6 Limit, and Harneys Corporate Services Limited, were companies incorporated in the Republic of Seychelles, the British Virgin Islands, and the British Virgin Islands, respectively. The applicants argued that the appointment of administrators to Vector Resources Limited prevented enforcement of the escrow deed and that the security interest under the escrow deed had not been perfected under the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth).

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicants had satisfied the requirements for leave under rule 10.43 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) and whether a prima facie case was established for the enforcement of the escrow deed. The court had to consider the validity and perfection of the security interest under the escrow deed, as well as the effect of the appointment of administrators on the security interest.

The court found that the applicants had satisfied the requirements for leave to serve an originating process outside Australia. The court was satisfied that the proceeding was of a kind mentioned in rule 10.42, the court had jurisdiction, and the applicants had a prima facie case for all or any of the relief claimed. The court also found that the security interest under the escrow deed was governed by Australian law and that the security interest had not been perfected. The court held that the appointment of administrators to Vector Resources Limited prevented enforcement of the security interest under the escrow deed.

The court granted the applicants leave to serve an originating process on the prospective defendants in foreign countries. The court ordered that the costs of the application be costs in the administration of the third applicant. The court's decision was based on the urgency of the matter and the need for final relief to be sought on an urgent basis if leave was granted for service out.