The Official Receiver of The State of Israel in his capacity as Liquidator North America Bank Limited (In Liquidation) v Raveh

(2001) 24 WAR 53; [2001] WASC 72

Supreme Court of Western Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Interlocutory injunctions
3. › Asset preservation orders (Mareva injunctions)
4. › General principles
5. › Requirement of connection to substantive proceedings in the court
6. › Whether order may be granted where only proposed proceeding is registration of foreign judgment
7. › Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth), ss 5, 6
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Interlocutory injunctions
3. › Asset preservation orders (Mareva injunctions)
4. › Jurisdictional foundation
5. › Whether interlocutory relief may exist in isolation from enforcement of substantive right
6. › Supreme Court Act 1935 (WA), s 25(9)
1. Private International Law
2. › Enforcement of foreign judgments
3. › Registration under Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth)
4. › Whether registration constitutes enforcement of substantive right pursued in the registering court
5. › Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth), ss 5, 6

Quick Take

A Mareva injunction cannot be obtained in an Australian court where the applicant's only proposed invocation of the court's jurisdiction is the future registration of a foreign judgment under the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth). Registration under that Act does not involve the enforcement of a substantive right or cause of action in the registering court, and therefore cannot provide the jurisdictional foundation for interlocutory asset preservation relief.