Australia, July 2 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement:

1. These are my reasons for making orders on the application of the fifth defendant on 30 May 2025, granting a stay of the execution of orders made against him on 20 December 2024 in favour of the second and fourth plaintiffs, until the conclusion of the first day of the hearing of the fifth defendant's appeal from those orders, conditional upon: (1) the fifth defendant providing a written undertaking to the Court and to the second and fourth plaintiffs not to deal with: (a) his property at 63 Albany Road, Toorak, Victoria (the Toorak property); and (b) any other property beneficially owned by the fifth defendant (except in the ordinary course of business); and (2) the fifth defendant granting to the second and fourth plaintiffs a charge in caveatable form over the Toorak property securing the judgment debts arising from the orders made on 20 December 2024. Those conditions are required to be complied with by 5:00pm on 3 June 2025, failing which the stay will not take effect.

Background

2. The background to the stay application may be summarised as follows.

3. On 8 November 2024, Ball J delivered reasons for judgment in these proceedings in which his Honour held that the fifth defendant had breached fiduciary duties owed to the first, second and fourth plaintiffs by his conduct in connection with a corporate restructure. His Honour found that the second and fourth plaintiffs were entitled to recover equitable compensation from the fifth defendant in respect of those breaches of fiduciary duties. [1]

4. On 20 December 2024, Ball J made orders requiring the fifth defendant to pay US$8,516,012.34 to the second plaintiff and US$7,467,406.41 to the fourth plaintiff, and to pay 90 per cent of the plaintiffs' costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis. [2]

5. The fifth defendant promptly filed a notice of intention to appeal on 22 December 2024. The fifth defendant did not apply for a stay of execution of the orders made by Ball J.

6. On 6 March 2025, the fifth defendant was served with bankruptcy notices issued by each of the second and fourth plaintiffs.

7. On 19 March 2025, the fifth defendant filed a notice of appeal.

8. On 21 March 2025, the fifth defendant filed an application in the Federal Court of Australia to extend the time for compliance with the bankruptcy notices.

9. At a directions hearing in relation to those applications before a Registrar of the Federal Court on 1 April 2025, counsel for the fifth defendant confirmed that no application had been made for a stay of the orders made by this Court which had given rise to the judgment debts in respect of which the bankruptcy notices had been issued. Counsel for the fifth defendant (the applicant for an extension of time) informed the Registrar that he was "guarded about what I say in respect of that" and that there had been "some information" that had "come to light in the last few days" that "may mean that further consideration is given to that position".

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/1972ee6100c76d2ce6984572)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.