Veall v Hughes

[2020] VSC 423

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION

TRUSTS, EQUITY AND PROBATE LIST

S ECI 2018 00730

ARTHUR ROWLAND VEALL	Plaintiff
v
DAVID HUGHES (in his capacity as Administrator of the Deceased Estate of ARTHUR KEITH VEALL) & ORS (according to the attached schedule)	Defendants

---

JUDGE:	Ierodiaconou AsJ
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	10 March 2020
DATE OF RULING:	13 July 2020
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Veall v Hughes
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VSC 423

---

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Pleadings – Application to further amend statement of claim – Application for joinder of parties – Whether there is a proper basis – Whether leave should be given to amend – Whether leave should be given to proceed as a beneficiary of the deceased estate and trusts – Whether pleadings of fraud and dishonest sufficient to establish a cause of action – Particularity required when alleging fraud or dishonesty – Whether leave should be given to join parties – Whether Harman undertaking applies – No proper basis – No real prospect of success – Insufficient pleadings – Applications disallowed – Civil Procedure Act 2010 ss 18, 23-24, 42, 46, Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 rr 9.06, 13.02, 13.10, 36.01 – Mandie v Memart Nominees Pty Ltd [2016] VSCA 4 – Cargill Australia Ltd v Viterra Malt Pty Ltd (No 10) [2018] VSC 439.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr M O’Connor	Katherine Moorhouse Perks
For the First Defendant	Mr C G Juebner	K&L Gates
For the Second and Third Defendants	Dr P Bender	DTCH Lawyers

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Summary.............................................................................................................................................. 1

Background......................................................................................................................................... 1

Proper Basis......................................................................................................................................... 5

Administrator’s submissions....................................................................................................... 5

Analysis.......................................................................................................................................... 5

Applicable Principles – Amendment......................................................................................... 8

Amendment Application................................................................................................................ 11

Allegations in paragraphs 4 – 6: Mr Martin and Mr Woods................................................ 12

Allegations in paragraphs 7 – 11: Bethal................................................................................. 12

Allegations in paragraph 12: Corartie (dissolved)................................................................. 13

Allegations in paragraphs 13 – 14:  AKV Nominees Pty Ltd (dissolved)........................... 13

Allegations in Part I of FASOC: Monies owed to the plaintiff as beneficiary of the AK Veall Family Trust..................................................................................................................................... 13

A:Allegations concerning approximately $30.5 million:  Bethal knowingly concerned in the wrongful conduct, paragraphs 15 – 36............................................................... 13

Plaintiff’s submissions......................................................................................... 15

Administrator’s submissions.............................................................................. 15

Second and third defendants’ submissions...................................................... 16

Analysis................................................................................................................. 16

B:Allegations concerning approximately $23 million:  paragraphs 37 – 46............ 19

Plaintiff’s submissions......................................................................................... 20

Second and third defendants’ submissions...................................................... 20

Analysis................................................................................................................ 21

Allegations in Part II of FASOC: Monies owing to the plaintiff as beneficiary paragraphs 47 – 55: Biretta Trust – Triton Energy Shares............................................................................... 23

Plaintiff’s submissions......................................................................................... 23

Second and third defendants’ submissions...................................................... 24

Analysis................................................................................................................. 25

Allegations in Part III of FASOC: Monies owing to the plaintiff as beneficiary of the Auspine Trust: paragraphs 56 – 65............................................................................................................. 27

Plaintiff’s submissions – Allegations in Parts III and IV of FASOC............. 28

Second and third defendants’ submissions...................................................... 29

Analysis................................................................................................................. 30

Allegations in Part IV of FASOC: Monies ($10 million) owing to the deceased / the estate out of the Kim Veall…