Clive Mensink yesterday failed in his bid to set aside multiple arrest warrants, for not attending the public examinations into the failed QLD Nickel venture and for being in contempt of court.
Readers may remember in June 2016 Mr Mensink left Australia, some 1 month after the special purpose liquidators (“SPL”) were appointed to QLD Nickel.
In August 2016, the SPL’s applied for summonses requiring Mr Mensink (and others) to attend examinations, pursuant to section 596A Corporations Act.
Mr Mensink allegedly never showed up and never returned to Australia. Despite attempting to set aside the arrest warrants, the Federal Court yesterday ruled that the primary Judge did not err in ordering the warrants:
(1) as it is doubtful that Mr Mensink did not have notice of the summonses, under Rule 11.10 Federal Court (Corporations) Rules; (
2) Mr Mensink has the burden of proving a “reasonable cause” for refusal (Struthers case). The reasonable cause proffered was not enough; and
(3) to “withdraw” from the jurisdiction in Rule 42.14(2) is rather broad: “if they evince an ongoing intention not to return.”
The case demonstrates the awesome power of the public examination instrument in sections 596A and 596B Corps Act.
Case link: https://jade.io/j/#!/article/594173