Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Starpicket Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCA 699 Citation: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Starpicket Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCA 699
Parties: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION v STARPICKET PTY LTD (ACN 125 918 550), CHRISTOPHER MUNDAY (AS THE FORMER LIQUIDATOR OF STARPICKET PTY LTD (ACN 125 918 550) and CRAIG WHEATLEY SCOTT AND PATRINA MAREE SCOTT
File number: QUD 433 of 2012
Judge: GORDON J
Date of judgment: 17 July 2013
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Date of last submissions: 4 July 2013
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: No catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 73
Solicitor for the Applicant: Australian Government Solicitor
Solicitor for the First and Third Respondents: Bennett & Philp Lawyers
Solicitor for the Second Respondent: Allens
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION QUD 433 of 2012
BETWEEN: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION
Applicant
AND: STARPICKET PTY LTD (ACN 125 918 550)
First Respondent
CHRISTOPHER MUNDAY (AS THE FORMER LIQUIDATOR OF STARPICKET PTY LTD (ACN 125 918 550)
Second Respondent
CRAIG WHEATLEY SCOTT AND PATRINA MAREE SCOTT
Third Respondents
JUDGE: GORDON J DATE OF ORDER: 17 JULY 2013 WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The interlocutory application dated 11 March 2013 is dismissed. 2. Pursuant to s 473(3)(b)(ii) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Corporations Act), the Second Respondent's remuneration in connection with the liquidation of the First Respondent be fixed in the amount of $46,183.50 (including GST). 3. Pursuant to s 1321(1) of the Corporations Act, the Second Respondent is entitled to his disbursements in connection with the liquidation of the First Respondent in the amount of $47,358.82 (including GST). 4. The Second Respondent is entitled to assert an equitable lien over the assets of the First Respondent securing his entitlement to the amounts referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 above. 5. The First Respondent pay the Applicant's and the Second Respondent's costs of and incidental to the interlocutory application, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
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