Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Keybridge Capital Limited v WAM Active Limited [2023] FCA 339 File number(s): VID 340 of 2022
Judgment of: BUTTON J
Date of judgment: 17 April 2023
Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – meeting – calling of general meeting by member – whether company had power to change venue of a physical meeting called by a member to an online meeting – whether the power to change the venue of the meeting was validly exercised – whether company's directors acted for a proper purpose – Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 249F
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 249F, 249R, 250A, 250B, 251A, 253Q, 253QA Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No 1) Act 2021 (Cth) sch 1 ASIC Corporations (Virtual-only Meetings) Instrument 2022/129 Guidance for the Pandemic (Movement and Gathering) Order 2022 (No 3) (Vic) Pandemic (Open Premises) Order 2022 (No 4) (Vic)
Cases cited: Bisan Ltd v Cellante [2002] VSC 430; (2002) 43 ACSR 322 Carson v Dynasty Metals Australia Ltd [2011] FCA 621 CellOS Software Ltd v Wong [2017] FCA 95; (2017) 118 ACSR 501 Central Exchange Ltd v Rivkin Financial Services Ltd [2004] FCA 1546; (2004) 213 ALR 771 Eastone Mining Pty Ltd v Eastone Holding Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1850; (2019) 142 ACSR 38 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Northwest Capital Management v Westate Capital Ltd [2012] WASC 121; (2012) 264 FLR 424
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
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