In brief - Liquidators apply for special leave to appeal to the High Court
The liquidators of Opes Prime applied for special leave to appeal to the High Court the decision to transfer the proceeding to the Supreme Court of Victoria. The application was refused.
Another instalment in long-running Opes Prime litigation
In our recent article Opes Prime and the jurisdictional reach of section 6: a postscript to Chubb v Moore, we discussed two recent decisions in the long-running Opes Prime litigation which concerned some of the consequences of the 2013 decision of the NSW Court of Appeal in Chubb v Moore regarding the operation of section 6 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946.
The liquidators of Opes Prime applied for special leave to appeal to the High Court one of those two decisions, the decision of Justice Ball in the Supreme Court of NSW to transfer the proceeding to the Supreme Court of Victoria. That application was refused by the High Court on 14 November 2014, on the basis that there was not sufficient doubt about the decision of Justice Ball to warrant a grant of special leave. (See Opes Prime Stockbroking Pty Ltd (In Liq) (Scheme Administrators Appointed) v Stevens & Ors  HCATrans 259.)
The High Court noted the ability to rely on section 6 in the Victorian Opes Prime proceeding, i.e. in circumstances where Chubb v Moore can (and most likely will) be contested by way of an appeal in the Victorian proceeding.
This is commentary published by Colin Biggers & Paisley for general information purposes only. This should not be relied on as specific advice. You should seek your own legal and other advice for any question, or for any specific situation or proposal, before making any final decision. The content also is subject to change. A person listed may not be admitted as a lawyer in all States and Territories. © Colin Biggers & Paisley, Australia 2019.