Walter Construction Group v The Robbins Company

Walter Construction Group brought an action against The Robbins Company, an American corporation, seeking a Mareva order to freeze the assets of the defendant. The dispute arose from a contract for work performed in Australia by a subsidiary of the defendant. Walter Construction alleged that it had not been paid for its work under the contract and sought relief under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW). The court had to determine whether the facts justified the grant of a Mareva order, which would restrain the defendant from removing its assets from Australia, and whether the power to grant such an order was activated by difficulties in enforcing judgments within the jurisdiction or by difficulties in enforcing judgments generally.

The court examined the nature of the dispute and the defendant's assets in Australia. The defendant had no assets in Australia apart from its shareholding in the subsidiary, debts owed by the subsidiary to it, and the adjudicated amount under the Security of Payment Act. The court considered whether these facts were sufficient to warrant the grant of a Mareva order. The court also had to decide whether the power to grant such an order was activated by the specific difficulties in enforcing judgments within the jurisdiction or by broader issues of enforcement.

The court concluded that the facts did not reveal a sufficient basis for the grant of a Mareva order. The court found that the power to grant a Mareva order was not activated by the specific difficulties in enforcing judgments within the jurisdiction, as the defendant's assets in Australia were limited. The court held that the order was not justified in the circumstances of the case. Consequently, the application for the Mareva order was dismissed.