Good evening, this is just a shot across the bow.
Order 2 of the orders made on 20 June 2022 indicate that the security monies have to be paid into Court. There's no evidence that a penny has passed the line yet. Rather, there are allegedly belated discussions taking place to see if there can be an agreement between the Applicants as to how much each will kick in. That should've been done long ago but so be it. My recollection is that ISX/SP1 has always maintained that they will prosecute the case against ASX robustly and diligently. That has been reflected in documents both prior to and since the demerger so there should be no reason to become lukewarm now.
I am at a loss to identify any benefit to an applicant who seeks to intentionally delay a case in circumstances where they have accused the other party of delay tactics. The following extract is taken directly from the Federal Court website:
The overarching purpose of civil practice and procedure and case management within the individual docket system is to facilitate the just resolution of disputes according to law as quickly, inexpensively and efficiently as possible - see ss 37M and 37N of the Federal Court Act.
The parties and their lawyers are expected, and have a statutory duty, to co-operate with the Court, and among themselves, to assist in achieving the overarching purpose. This includes identifying the real issues in dispute early and in dealing with those issues efficiently. There are no exceptions to this expectation because of the size or nature of the matter.
This co-operation requires parties (and their lawyers) to think about the best way to run their cases conformably with the overarching purpose.
Further, it is enshrined in legislation (see: Sections 37M and 37N
Federal Court of Australia Act (1976) - they're not hard to find).
Now, the Applicants need to get their collective act together and get this show on the road. Despite what many here appear to think, it is the Federal Court who are calling the shots on this, not the Applicants and certainly not any of their directors, past or present. There's none of these so-called 'tactics' in play and if the Applicants think there are, then they are quite seriously mistaken. I would hope that they are not doing this and, if they are, it is not with the imprimatur of their instructed lawyers. The Courts don't bow to the whims of the litigants. That's why show cause hearings were put in place - to keep tardy litigants on the rails.
The Applicants are already in default of the Court order. If they do not pay the monies into Court, then they run the real risk of an application being brought in time to have the proceedings dismissed for want of due despatch. The Federal Court is not going to permit an applicant to have an ongoing permanent stay. I am hopeful it won't come to that because it will be a colossal waste of time, effort, and money. One way to be sure is to pay the security monies forthwith and get a final timetable put in place.
Even if that occurs and the matter is put back before a Judge next week, there is not a scintilla of a chance of
ISX v ASX being listed for Hearing before this time next year at the earliest, more likely late 2023. In either case, the judgment in the ASIC matter will have been delivered following the two week trial starting late Feb 2023. The outcome of that may shift strategies.
