The case confirms that the threshold for raising new arguments after an appeal judgment has been handed down but before final orders are made is even higher than the already exceptional circumstances required for new arguments on appeal generally. The Court applied a 2% restitutionary interest rate on amounts to be repaid following reversal on appeal, consistent with MLC v Daffy [No 2] and Leeda v Zeng [No 2]. On costs, the case illustrates that a successful party's misconduct in the underlying transactions can justify departure from the prima facie indemnity costs rule under r 26.08, but the offer of compromise remains a critical consideration that may still result in the opposing party bearing costs on a party/party basis from the date of the offer.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.