Australia: Postscript to Opes Prime - application for special leave to appeal to the High Court refused

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 installment 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.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.