Insights

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 [2014] 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 article has been published by Colin Biggers & Paisley for information and education purposes only and is a general summary of the topic(s) presented. This article is not specific legal advice. Please seek your own legal advice for any questions you may have. All information contained in this article is subject to change. Colin Biggers & Paisley cannot be held responsible for any liability whatsoever, or for any loss howsoever arising from any reliance upon the contents of this article.​