← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case forum non conveniens

Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd

(1990) 171 CLR 538
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year1990
StatusBinding authority

Summary

HCA established the 'clearly inappropriate forum' test for forum non conveniens stays in Australia, a more restrictive standard than the English Spiliada test.

Key Principle

The HCA established the 'clearly inappropriate forum' test for stays on forum non conveniens grounds in Australia; the test is more restrictive than the English Spiliada test.

Area of Law

procedure

Related Cases

Getswift Ltd v Webb (2022) 276 CLR 553

High Court of Australia held there is no power to make a common fund order in favour of litigation funders at the interlocutory stage of a class action.

UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77

Anshun estoppel bars relitigation where it was unreasonable not to raise the issue in earlier proceedings; re-litigation may also constitute abuse of process.

Palmer v Ayres (2017) 259 CLR 478

High Court of Australia held the reflective loss principle (Prudential Assurance rule) does not apply in Australia, permitting shareholders to recover losses independently of the company.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pt...