Lawyers for litigation

ASIC v Wallet Ventures PL [2025] FCAFC 93

ASIC v Wallet Ventures PL [2025] FCAFC 93

CORPORATIONS – meaning of debenture in s 9 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – where respondent operated a digital currency exchange through which customers could buy and sell certain cryptocurrencies – where respondent also offered a Finder application (Finder App) on mobile device platforms through which its customers could, amongst other things, access the “Finder Earn” product – where by investing in the Finder Earn product customers could exchange funds in their account to obtain “TrueAUD” stablecoins ownership of which was transferred to the respondent enabling the customer to earn a “return” quantified in TrueAUD which upon expiry of the term was credited to the customer’s Finder Wallet account in AUD – where primary judge held the respondent’s “Finder Earn” product was not a debenture on the basis that there was no money “deposited with or lent to” the respondent or in the alternative that there was no undertaking by the company to repay as a debt that money


Related cases about corporate law

  • Transport Workers’ Union of Australia v Qantas Airways Limited (Order to Recall Witnesses) [2024] FCA 572

    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where contravention of a civil remedy provision previously found – where applicant seeks statutory compensation under s 545(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – where new “logical counterfactual” argument raised by the respondent in closing submissions – overarching purpose of civil practice and procedure provisions considered – where in…

  • Gaha v Gaha [2024] FCA 531

    CORPORATIONS – application by litigation representative for approval of deed of compromise – whether litigation representative is an ‘independent’ lawyer for purposes of r 9.71(2)(c) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – whether compromise in best interest of applicant – confidentiality orders

  • Crowley v Worley Limited (Costs) [2024] FCA 211

    COSTS – whether costs should be apportioned – where applicant succeeded on several questions but failed to obtain compensation – where any victory was Pyrrhic – costs not apportioned COSTS – whether order should extend to costs of initial trial before remitter – where evidence from initial trial deployed on remitter – where initial trial…

Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2025/2025fcafc0093For more information, see the original judgement.

Posted

in

, ,
Send this to a friend