Borg v Northern Rivers Finance Pty Ltd & Ors [2005] QCA 250
1
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Borg & Ors v Northern Rivers Finance P/L & Ors [2005]
QCA 250
PARTIES: ANDREW JAMES BORG
(first plaintiff/appellant/applicant)
JASON MARK BYRNE
(second plaintiff)
ROBERT STUART CHRISTENSEN
(third plaintiff)
GLEN ANGELLO COPPO
(fourth plaintiff)
LAURENCE ROY DIXON
(fifth plaintiff)
IAN ANTHONY GLAZEBROOK
(sixth plaintiff)
MICHAEL CHARLES GOTTKE
(seventh plaintiff)
BRIAN KENNETH HINCHEY
(eight plaintiff)
ROBERT MICHAEL McCLOY
(ninth plaintiff)
NANCY MARY MONTGOMERY
(tenth plaintiff)
HENRY ALEXANDER MONTGOMERY
(eleventh plaintiff)
GORDON EDWARD PARISH
(twelfth plaintiff)
GORDON JOHN REID
(thirteenth plaintiff)
JAMES MICHAEL ROACH
(fourteenth plaintiff)
GLEN ALAN SCOTT
(fifteenth plaintiff)
GASPAR SICH
(sixteenth plaintiff)
NEIL GREGORY CAMERON
(seventeenth plaintiff)
COLIN SCOTT PURDIE
(eighteenth plaintiff)
GEOFFREY DAVID RAPSON
(nineteenth plaintiff)
DREW KINGSLEY WOODMAN
(twentieth plaintiff)
NIKO JOZINOVIC
(twenty-first plaintiff)
v
-- 1 of 5 --
2
NORTHERN RIVERS FINANCE PTY LTD
ACN 069 279 134
(first defendant)
INVESTMENT LICENCING PTY LTD
ACN 072 428 794
(second defendant)
NORTHERN RIVERS PLANTATION MANAGEMENT
LTD
ACN 069 059 132
(third defendant)
DARREN PAWSKI and RALPH MARCEL NUNIS
trading as SECURINVEST ACCOUNTING SERVICES
(fourth defendant/first respondent)
DREW GRAHAM FRANCIS
(fifth defendant)
BASE METALS EXPLORATION NL
ACN 081 009 181
(sixth defendant)
EXPLORERS AND PROSPECTORS FINANCE LTD
ACN 081 392 841
(seventh defendant)
DARREN CHARLES HORNER
(eighth defendant/second respondent)
JOHN MEARES
(ninth defendant)
BANALASTA OIL PLANTATION LTD
ACN 078 104 711
(tenth defendant/third respondent)
SAFEINVEST PTY LTD
ACN 081 664 315
(eleventh defendant)
KAREN EVANS
(twelfth defendant)
PLANTATION EQUITY PTY LTD
ACN 078 104 579
(thirteenth defendant/fourth respondent)
FILE NO/S: Appeal No 5587 of 2004
SC No 191 of 2000
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Miscellaneous Application – Civil
ORIGINATING
COURT: Supreme Court at Mackay
DELIVERED EX
TEMPORE ON: 21 July 2005
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers
-- 2 of 5 --
3
JUDGES: McMurdo P, Williams and Jerrard JJA
Judgment of the Court
ORDER: The fourth respondent/thirteenth defendant repay to the
applicant/appellant the sum of $32,195.79 paid to it in
satisfaction of the learned primary judge's order number
5
CATCHWORDS: APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – PRACTICE
AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – POWERS OF
COURT – ORDERS SET ASIDE OR VARIED – primary
judge entered judgment in favour of applicant against first
respondent and judgment in favour of fourth respondent
against applicant – fourth respondent obtained enforcement
warrant redirecting debt owed to applicant by first respondent
– by oversight applicant did not seek order for return of
monies paid to fourth respondent in notice of appeal –
applicant obtained order setting aside primary judge's order in
favour of fourth respondent against applicant in Court of
Appeal – applicant subsequently applied for variation of
order to include repayment by fourth respondent of monies
paid to it in satisfaction of primary judge's order – application
not opposed by fourth respondent – whether order consistent
with reasons of the Court in the appeal – whether the Court
has power to make further order sought
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 388, r 667(2)(d)
The Commonwealth v McCormack (1984) 155 CLR 273,
applied
Queensland Pork Pty Ltd v Lott [2003] QCA 271; Appeal No
204 of 2003, 4 July 2003, applied
SOLICITORS: McKays Solicitors for the applicant
Mullins Lawyers for the respondents
THE PRESIDENT: The parties have indicated that they wish this
matter to be heard on the papers and that there is no
appearance today. The Court has reviewed all the relevant
material and I am authorised by the other members of the Court
to deliver the following reasons of the Court in this
application for a further order.
This Court delivered its reasons and pronounced orders in this
appeal on 8 April 2005: see Borg v Pawski and Ors [2005] QCA
-- 3 of 5 --
4
96, Appeal No 5587 of 2004, 8 April 2005. On 8 June 2005 the
applicant/appellant, Mr Borg, applied to the Court for orders
varying those made by this Court on 8 April 2005 to include an
order that the fourth respondent/thirteenth defendant,
Plantation Equity Pty Ltd ("Plantation Equity"), repay Mr Borg
the sum of $32,195.79 paid to it in satisfaction of the
learned primary judge's order number 5.
As I have noted the relevant parties have requested that this
application be dealt with on the filed papers without the
parties appearing in Court. Plantation Equity has informed
the Court through the Registry in writing that it does not
intend to file any material nor make any submissions in
response to Mr Borg's application and submissions.
Mr Borg did not ask this Court to make the order he now seeks
in his notice of appeal. Through his lawyers, he concedes
that this was an oversight and states that it was attributable
to his legal representatives.
The orders made by the learned primary judge, the subject of
the appeal, included an order that Mr Borg pay Plantation
Equity $116,236.69 (order 5). His Honour also ordered that
the first respondent/fourth defendant, Darren Pawski and Ralph
Nunis trading as "SecurInvest Accounting Services"
("SecurInvest"), pay Mr Borg a total of $32,195.79 (orders 2
and 3).
-- 4 of 5 --
5
SecurInvest paid the amount of $32,195.79 to Plantation Equity
on 21 June 2004 under an enforcement warrant authorising the
redirection of the debt of $32,195.79 owed to Mr Borg from
SecurInvest.
When this Court made the orders in the appeal on 8 April 2005
it was unaware of those facts. In the circumstances now
established it is consistent with the reasons of this Court in
the appeal that Plantation Equity should repay the amount of
$32,195.79 to Mr Borg. There are no submissions to the
contrary. Had this Court been possessed of all the relevant
facts when it pronounced the orders in the appeal on 8 April
2005 it would have made the order now sought.
This Court has power to make the further order sought:
see Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 388 and
r 667(2)(d), Queensland Pork Pty Ltd v Lott [2003] QCA 271
Appeal No 204 of 2003, 4 July 2003, paras [1]-[2], [19] and
[40], and The Commonwealth v McCormack (1984) 155 CLR 273 at
277.
This Court should now make that further order. The further
order of the Court is that the fourth respondent/thirteenth
defendant repay to the applicant/appellant the sum of
$32,195.79 paid to it in satisfaction of the learned primary
judge's order number 5.
-----
-- 5 of 5 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCA/2005/250