BACKGROUND
2 On 14 August 2015, I made orders in Yeo and Rambaldi (as liquidators), in the matter of Rennie Produce (Aust) Pty Ltd (in liquidation) [2015] FCA 849 (the 'First Orders'), in respect of the production of documents by several foreign financial entities, and subsequently signed letters directed to several foreign courts requesting their aid in enforcing orders in respect of the production of documents.
3 While the application for the First Orders was taking place, further investigations into the examinable affairs of the Rennie Produce (Aust) Pty Ltd (in liquidation) ('RPA') were being conducted. Those investigations resulted in the Applicants making an application for a liquidator's examination of the Australian Federal Police ('AFP'), further to such applications having previously been made. This application was granted by this Court and resulted in a number of further documents being produced. As those documents were examined, it became apparent to the Applicants that they wished to make this (further) application for the production of documents by two other foreign financial entities ('Current Application').
4 The Applicants formed the view that, to avoid duplicating costs in carrying out the process, at least in Switzerland, they would make, and await the determination of, the Current Application prior to commencing the court processes in the overseas jurisdiction. As such, the Applicants have also sought an extension of time for compliance with order 1 of the orders made on 14 August 2015.
5 The Applicants rely on the affidavits of Andrew Reginald Yeo, a joint liquidator of RPA and a plaintiff in this proceeding, sworn on 11 December 2013 ('First Affidavit'), 21 November 2014, 10 June 2015, 14 August 2015 ('Fourth Affidavit'), 23 March 2016 ('Fifth Affidavit') and on 27 April 2016.
6 In the reasons to the First Orders ('Previous Reasons'), I set out at paragraphs [2]-[5] the relevant background to the Applicants' application for overseas financial institutions to produce the necessary documents to this Court. For the purposes of the Current Application, it is worth restating the following:
(a) In his First Affidavit, Mr Yeo deposed that in October 2012 RPA entered into terms of settlement with its former director, Paul Rennie, and related entities (collectively the 'Rennie Parties'). The terms of settlement were premised on the sale of certain businesses and assets of the Rennie Parties, and that the Rennie Parties would, on settlement of that sale, pay the settlement amount, or some of it, to the Applicants. The terms of settlement also provided that, within a certain time, the Rennie Parties would repatriate to Australia any offshore funds held by them (or for their benefit) as at the effective date of the terms of settlement (the 'Effective Date') in excess of $13 million, and divide the repatriated funds between the liquidators and the Rennie Parties. If the Rennie Parties did not repatriate the offshore funds in full, all right, title and interest in any non-repatriated offshore funds were to be assigned to RPA. That right, title and interest would be an asset of RPA in the liquidation.
(b) Mr Yeo also deposed that the Rennie Parties had failed or refused to cooperate with the liquidators to establish that all offshore funds held by or for the benefit of the Rennie Parties had in fact been repatriated. Mr Yeo considered it necessary to conduct examinations to determine what offshore funds were held by or for the benefit of the Rennie Parties as at the Effective Date, and the quantum and whereabouts of any non-repatriated offshore funds (if any), being assets of RPA in the winding up, and forming part of the examinable affairs of RPA.
7 On 5 December 2014, this Court issued a summons for the examination of Mohammed Hussain of the AFP ('First AFP Summons').
8 On 20 January 2015, Mr Hussain produced various documents pursuant to the First AFP Summons. One such document was a report that listed each of the items seized by the AFP, pursuant to various search warrants executed during 2010 and 2012 ('Property Seizure Report').
9 Mr Yeo swore his Fourth Affidavit supporting an application for further summons ('Second AFP Summons') to be issued to Mr Hussain, in light of the information contained in the Property Seizure Report. Mr Yeo deposed to various reasons why production was sought of certain documents detailed in the Property Seizure Report and in the possession of the AFP.
10 On 20 August 2015, this Court issued the Second AFP Summons.
11 On 23 September 2015, Mr Hussain produced various documents pursuant to the Second AFP Summons. The documents produced by Mr Hussain included documents relating to the following further offshore bank accounts:
(a) Account 108356 at United Mizrahi Bank ('Offshore account 9');
(b) Account 105772 at United Mizrahi Bank ('Offshore account 10'); and
(c) Account 0233-671793.40G Master No. 0233-671793 at UBS AG (Switzerland) ('Offshore account 11')
(together, the 'Offshore Accounts').
12 In light of this, in his Fifth Affidavit, Mr Yeo deposed that:
(a) on 4 February 2014, the Court issued a summons to Mr Rennie which required him to produce to the Court '[d]ocuments evidencing the amount of Offshore Funds (as defined in the Deed of Settlement dated 3 September 2012) held by or for the benefit of the Rennie Parties (as defined in the Deed of Settlement) and/or their related entities as at 4 October 2012.' However, in answer to this summons, Mr Rennie did not produce any bank statements for Offshore Accounts 9 or 11 as at 4 October 2012;
(b) during the course of Mr Yeo's investigations into the affairs of RPA, he identified facts in relation to the Offshore Accounts that strongly indicate that these accounts were controlled by the Rennie Parties or their associates and may hold offshore funds that are assets in the liquidation of RPA;
(c) an order for the production of the documents that are the subject of the Current Application, by the foreign financial institutions in question, would assist the liquidators in conducting the ongoing examinations of Mr Rennie into the quantum and whereabouts of offshore funds that are assets in the liquidation of RPA; and
(d) the liquidators have received legal advice from solicitors in each of the foreign jurisdictions in question, which advice leads them to believe that if the orders sought were made by the Court, those orders would likely be enforced by the courts in each of the jurisdictions in question.