Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd v Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd [No 9]

Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd brought proceedings against Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd, seeking various reliefs, including an injunction. Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd, in response, filed an interlocutory application for a stay of proceedings and a referral to arbitration. The application was made pursuant to a deed executed between the parties, which contained an arbitration clause. The court had to determine whether the proceedings should be stayed and whether the findings of fact going to the voidability or voidness of the deed should be decided during the stay application hearing. Furthermore, the court had to decide whether an interlocutory order should be made to restrain the parties from relying on the deed during the proceedings.

The court considered the principle that a party cannot be deprived of the opportunity to challenge the validity of an arbitration agreement. The court held that it was not appropriate to determine findings of fact going to the voidability or voidness of the deed at the stay application hearing. The court also held that an interlocutory order should be made to restrain the parties from relying on the deed during the proceedings.

Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd's application for interlocutory relief was dismissed. Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd's application for a stay of proceedings and a referral to arbitration was granted. The court made an interlocutory order restraining the parties from relying on the deed during the proceedings.

No further orders were made.