Richardson v Lo Pilato (Liquidator); In the Matter of Trojan Hospitality (ACT) Pty Limited (In Liq) [2014] FCA 888

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Richardson v Lo Pilato (Liquidator); In the Matter of Trojan Hospitality (ACT) Pty Limited (In Liq) [2014] FCA 888 Citation: Richardson v Lo Pilato (Liquidator); In the Matter of Trojan Hospitality (ACT) Pty Limited (In Liq) [2014] FCA 888

Parties: KEVIN RICHARDSON and RICH AND SON (ACT) PTY LTD (ACN 130 976 260) v FRANK LO PILATO AS LIQUIDATOR OF TROJAN HOSPITALITY (ACT) PTY LIMITED, TROJAN HOSPITALITY (ACT) PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) (ACN 115 869 595), JUSTINE LOUISE ROBINSON and JUSTINE LOUISE ROBINSON AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF CRAIG BRIAN ROBINSON, DECEASED JUSTINE LOUISE ROBINSON AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE CRAIG BRIAN ROBINSON and JUSTINE LOUISE ROBINSON v TROJAN HOSPITALITY ACT PTY LIMITED (ACN 115 869 595) and RICH AND SON (ACT) PTY LTD (ACN 130 976 260)

File numbers: ACD 36 of 2012 ACD 67 of 2012

Judge: FOSTER J

Date of judgment: 20 August 2014

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether the Court should make orders by consent in order to give effect to a settlement of two sets of proceedings in circumstances where one party in one proceeding being the liquidator of another party in the proceeding has filed a submitting notice yet still wishes to be heard in relation to the proposed orders and has not consented to them – relevant principles discussed EQUITY – whether the Court is satisfied to an appropriate level of comfort that there is admissible and probative evidence justifying the making of consent orders giving effect to a Quistclose trust in circumstances where the liquidator of the recipient of the relevant payment does not consent to those orders and suggests that they ought not be made