Good acknowledgement, Good Oil. As I said in an earlier post (linked here #https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/27725256/single) I always thought XST had a good case, and their position is even stronger now. I'm not acting for XST, and am not even a shareholder so I don't know all the details but here are a few principles, as I see them. XST has a well regarded international law firm acting for them so they'll be getting legal advice on making this stick:
1.
A defence to a summary judgment application needs to be supported by sworn evidence. Perjury ain't an option. Sounds like at least 3 of the Defendants realised they didn't have much to go on. All credit to them for not trying to dress mutton up as lamb.
2.
Western Australian Supreme Court judgments can easily be enforced in Singapore – and numerous other places where a defendant has assets – either currently or in future. The defendants now have a sword hanging over their heads - not a nice way to live.
3. It's
not always easy or successful to shuffle assets around to avoid creditors (although I agree that Skase got away with a lot). Transaction costs can be high and there are risks of trying that on, including to reputations – especially for people hoping to work in the same line of business - and
especially if your claimed skill set is as a dependable financier.
4. The
judgment debt is likely to be joint and several, given the nature of the agreement. Therefore, it
could be enforced against any one of the defendants for the full amount including costs, plus interest, if one or more of the other defendants did not pay their expected "share". That gets people to the table, quick-smart.
XST shareholders have very good leverage here. They'll get worthwhile $ IMO
