Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Panadell Architectural Cladding Systems Pty Limited v Panadell Industries Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 511 Citation: Panadell Architectural Cladding Systems Pty Limited v Panadell Industries Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 511
Parties: PANADELL ARCHITECTURAL CLADDING SYSTEMS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v PANADELL INDUSTRIES PTY LTD; RODERICK MACKAY SUTHERLAND AND SULE ARNAUTOVIC AS LIQUIDATORS
File number: NSD 393 of 2010
Judge: EMMETT J
Date of judgment: 7 May 2010
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 266
Date of hearing: 23 April and 7 May 2010
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: No catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 20
Counsel for the Plaintiffs: A Spencer
Solicitor for the Plaintiffs: Bartier Perry
Counsel for the Defendant: R Freeman
Solicitor for the Defendant: Colbron & Associates
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION NSD 393 of 2010
BETWEEN: RODERICK MACKAY SUTHERLAND AND SULE ARNAUTOVIC AS LIQUIDATORS OF PANADELL ARCHITECTURAL CLADDING SYSTEMS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
First Plaintiff
PANADELL ARCHITECTURAL CLADDING SYSTEMS PTY LIMITED
Second Plaintiff
AND: PANADELL INDUSTRIES PTY LTD
Defendant
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER: 7 MAY 2010
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The time for the lodgement of notice pursuant to section 263(1)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act)of the charge granted by the defendant to the first and second plaintiffs dated 10 September 2009 (the First Charge)with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (the Commission) be extended up to and including 9 April 2010. 2. The time for the lodgement of notice pursuant to section 263(1)(a) of the Act of the charge granted by the defendant to the first and second plaintiffs dated 2 November 2009 the Second Charge) with the Commission be extended up to and including 9 April 2010. 3. Any administrator, creditor or liquidator of the defendant be granted liberty to apply to the Court to vary order 1 if a creditor of the defendant has advanced funds or given credit to the defendant in reliance on the Australian Register of Company Charges not disclosing the existence of the First Charge between 10 September 2009 and 9 April 2010. 4. Any administrator, creditor or liquidator of the defendant be granted liberty to apply to the Court to vary order 2 if a creditor of the defendant has advanced funds or given credit to the defendant in reliance on the Australian Register of Company Charges not disclosing the existence of the Second Charge between 2 November 2009 and 9 April 2010. 5. Order 1 be without prejudice to the rights of any person in consequence of any dealings by that person with any property the subject of the First Charge, where the dealing occurred between 10 September 2009 and 9 April 2010. 6. Order 2 be without prejudice to the rights of any person in consequence of any dealings by that person with any property the subject of the Second Charge, where the dealing occurred between 2 November 2009 and 9 April 2010. 7. The plaintiffs pay the costs of the defendant as agreed or taxed.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate