NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : (2003) 45 ACSR 215
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Nommack (No 100) Pty Limited v FAI Insurances Limited (in Liquidation) [2003] NSWSC 359 revised - 08/05/2003 HEARING DATE(S) : 11/11/02 JUDGMENT DATE : 1 May 2003
JUDGMENT OF : Burchett AJ at 1 DECISION : I direct the appellant to bring in on a date to be fixed short minutes of orders appropriate to reflect these reasons.
CATCHWORDS : Corporations - liquidation - leave to proceed - appeal from Master's discretion - admission and effect of fresh evidence having regard to s.75A of the Supreme Court Act and House v The King - effect of real prospect a proof of debt would be rejected necessitating litigation in any event - large, complex and serious claim - obligation of Court exercising discretion to give reasons that explain the basis of the decision - effect of need for discovery and interrogatories - question of security for costs raised on leave application - appeal allowed subject to conditions - appropriate costs order LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Do Carmo v Ford Excavations Pty Ltd [1981] 1 NSWLR 409 RT & YE Falls Investments Pty Ltd v State of New South Wales (1998) BC 9802115 Wickstead v Browne (1992) 30 NSWLR 1 Hartigan v International Krishna Consciousness [1999] NSWSC 139 Vagrand Pty Limited (in liquidation) v Fielding (1993) 41 FCR 550 CASES CITED : Re Coastal Constructions Pty Ltd (in liq) (1994) 13 ACSR 329 Sohn v Minniti [2002] WASCA 263 Capita Financial Group Ltd v Rothwells Ltd (1989) 15 ACLR 348 Ibbco v HIH [2001] NSWSC 346 Ogilvie-Grant v East liquidator of Gordon Grant and Grant Pty Ltd (1983) 7 ACLR 669 Meehan v Stockmans Australian Cafe (Holdings) Pty Limited (1996) 15 ACLC 62 BHG Nominees Pty Ltd v Ellis Young Investments Pty Ltd (1998) 16 ACLC 1539 PARTIES : Nommack (No 100) Pty Limited FAI Insurances Limited (in Liquidation) FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 13048/91 COUNSEL : Appellant: Mr G Burton Respondent: Mr B Coles QC SOLICITORS : Appellant: Beazley Singleton Respondent: Blake Dawson Waldron
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