Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Geowash Pty Ltd (Subject to a Deed of Company Arrangement) (No 6) [2023] FCA 37

Federal Court of Australia

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Geowash Pty Ltd (Subject to a Deed of Company Arrangement) (No 6) [2023] FCA 37 File number: WAD 230 of 2017

Judgment of: COLVIN J

Date of judgment: 31 January 2023

Division: General Division

Registry: Western Australia

National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations

Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection

Number of paragraphs: 4

Date of last submissions: 12 January 2023

Date of hearing: Determined on the papers

Solicitor for the Applicant: Norton Rose Fulbright

Appointed Accountant: Mr R Kirman of McGrath Nicol

ORDERS WAD 230 of 2017

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION Applicant

AND: GEOWASH PTY LTD (SUBJECT TO A DEED OF COMPANY ARRANGEMENT) (ACN 153 078 766) First Respondent

SANAM ALI Second Respondent

CHARLES CAMERON Third Respondent

order made by: COLVIN J DATE OF ORDER: 31 january 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Subject to any further order appointing an accountant to give effect to the redress orders made on 24 January 2020, the appointment of Mr Kirman pursuant to those orders shall be concluded upon the provision by Mr Kirman to the applicant of a final report. 2. There be leave to the applicant to apply for the appointment of an accountant to give effect to the redress orders in the event that there is a material change in circumstances. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

COLVIN J: 1 Ms Sanam Ali and Mr Charles Cameron were each found to have contravened the Australian Consumer Law and the Franchising Code of Conduct in relation to their dealings concerning Geowash carwash franchises. They were each ordered to pay consumer redress of $500,000. An independent accountant was appointed to administer the orders of the Court concerning the distribution of those funds. Ms Ali and Mr Cameron each filed a debtor's petition. They have both been declared bankrupt. Proofs of debt in respect of the redress amounts have been lodged. The accountant has informed the Court of communications from the trustees of the bankrupt estates to the effect that there will be no funds (in the case of Ms Ali) and insufficient funds (in the case of Mr Cameron) to enable a return to creditors. 2 In the above circumstances, the accountant, Mr Kirman of McGrath Nicol, seeks permission to finalise his appointment on the basis that an application may be made for the appointment of an accountant to give effect to the redress orders in the event that there is a change in circumstances. 3 Liberty was reserved to the applicant in the proceedings, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, to apply to vary the redress orders. The Commission supports the making of orders to give effect to the request by the accountant. 4 I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make orders finalising the appointment on the basis proposed and that there is jurisdiction to make them pursuant to the liberty reserved pursuant to the final orders made on 24 January 2020. I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Colvin.