NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Super Vision Resources Ltd BVI Registered No 1810534 v AC Holdings Co Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 319 Hearing dates: 6, 7 and 8 October 2020 Decision date: 10 December 2020 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Meagher JA at [2]; White JA at [138] Decision: (1) Direct the parties attempt to agree the orders, including declarations, to be made by way of final relief to give effect to the conclusions in the reasons of Meagher JA. In the event of agreement, the form of orders should be provided to Meagher JA's associate within 28 days. (2) Direct that failing such agreement, the orders contended for by each party, and written submissions supporting the making of those orders (not exceeding 5 pages), be exchanged within a further 14 days. The matters remaining in issue will then be dealt with on the papers. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – notices to admit – where formal admission made by the transferring party that transfer made with intent to defraud – whether admission binding on other parties to proceeding against whom intent to defraud must be proved CONVEYANCING – transfers in fraud of creditors – Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), s 37A – where partly encumbered properties transferred at undervalue – whether transferred with intent to defraud creditors – whether appellant a person prejudiced by transfers – whether transferee had notice of intent to defraud – meaning of "notice" in s 37A(3) Legislation Cited: Bankruptcy Act 1996 (Cth), s 121 Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), ss 37A, 164 Fraudulent Conveyances Act 1571 (13 Eliz I c 5) Law of Property Act 1925 (UK), s 172 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 17.3(2) Cases Cited: Abalos v Australian Postal Commission (1990) 171 CLR 167; [1990] HCA 47 Barton v Vanheythuysen (1853) 68 ER 1215; 11 Hare 126 Bott v Smith (1856) 21 Beav. 511; 52 ER 957 Brady v Stapleton (1952) 85 CLR 322; [1952] HCA 62 Cadogan v Kennett (1776) 98 ER 1171; 2 Cowp 423 Camm v Linke Nominees Pty Ltd (2010) 190 FCR 193; [2010] FCA 1148 Coghlan v Alexander (1905) 5 SR (NSW) 441 CSR Ltd v Maddalena [2006] HCA 1; (2006) 80 ALJR 458 DKLR Holding Co (No 2) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Stamp Duties (NSW) (1982) 149 CLR 431; [1982] HCA 14 Ex parte Chaplain; In Re Sinclair (1884) 26 Ch D 319 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22 French v French (1855) 4 De GM & G 95; 43 ER 1166 Glegg v Bromley [1912] 3 KB 474 Golden J Wealth Pty Ltd v AC Holdings Co Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1342 Halfey v Tait [1875] 1 VLR (E) 8 In re Fasey; ex parte Trustees [1923] 2 Ch 1 In re Gunsbourg [1920] 2 KB 426 In re Johnson; Golden v Gillam (1881) 20 Ch D 389 In re Maddever; Three Towns Banking Company v Maddever (1884) 27 Ch 523 In re Mouat; Kingston Cotton Mills v Mouat [1899] 1 Ch 831 In re Reis; ex parte Clough [1904] 2 KB 769 In re Simms [1930] 2 Ch 22 Jerome v Kelly (Inspector of Taxes) [2004] 1 WLR 1409 Kern Corp Ltd v Walker Reid Trading Pty Ltd (1987) 163 CLR 164; [1987] HCA 20 Lee v Lee (2019) 266 CLR 129; [2019] HCA 28 Lloyds Bank Ltd v Marcan [1973] 1 WLR 339 Lo Pilato (Trustee) v Kamy Saeedi Lawyers Pty Ltd Re Adzic (Bankrupt) (2017) 249 FCR 69; [2017] FCA 34 Marcolongo v Chen (2011) 242 CLR 546; [2011] HCA 30 Nguyen v Corbett [2017] NSWSC 1689 PT Garuda Indonesia Ltd v Grellman (1992) 35 FCR 515 at 522; 107 ALR 199 Re Hyams; Official Receiver v Hyams (1971) 19 FCR 232 Re Kelly; ex parte Young (1932) 4 ABC 258 Rolle v Ryall (1749) 26 ER 107; 1 Atk 165 Ross v Vaughan [2016] NSWCA 188 Silvera v Savic (1999) 46 NSWLR 124; [1999] NSWSC 83 Taylor v Coenen (1876) 1 Ch D 636 The English and Scottish Mercantile Investment Co Ltd v Brunton [1892] 2 QB 700 Wentworth v Rogers [2004] NSWCA 340 Texts Cited: Halsbury's Laws of England (1st ed, London: Butterworth, 1911) May and Worthington, A treatise on the statutes of Elizabeth against fraudulent conveyances (2nd ed, London: Stevens and Haynes, 1887) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Super Vision Resources Ltd BVI Registered No 1810534 (Appellant) AC Holdings Co Pty Ltd (First Respondent) Qiao Wang (Second Respondent) Lawrence Xu (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: A Leopold SC with J P Knackstredt (Appellant) D Pritchard SC with B M Zipser (First and Second Respondents)
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