New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Kassem v Milman International (Aust) Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 210 HEARING DATE(S) : 11/03/05 JUDGMENT DATE : 11 March 2005 Equity Division JURISDICTION : Corporations List JUDGMENT OF : Young CJ in Eq DECISION : Convening period extended for three weeks. CATCHWORDS : CORPORATIONS [180]- Administration-Convening period- Whether to be extended. LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 439A Ozem Kassem (P) PARTIES : Milman International (Aust) Pty Limited (Administrator Appointed) (D) FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 1867/05 COUNSEL : E T Finnane (P) SOLICITORS : McCabe Terrill (P) LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : - 2 - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION CORPORATIONS LIST YOUNG CJ in EQ Friday 11 March 2005 1867/05 – KASSEM v MILMAN INTERNATIONAL (AUST) PTY LTD JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: This is an application by an administrator to extend for three weeks the convening period of the second meeting under the Corporations Act. The application is made under s 439A(6) of the Corporations Act 2001. That Act, in many respects, imposes unreal burdens on administrators in getting ready on time, but as the Parliament has spoken, so the courts must respect the spirit of the Act. 2 Applications to extend the convening period are not automatically granted. First of all, the court must be satisfied that the administrator has, in the circumstances, done all that could be done, taking into account the economics of the situation. However, the evidence must then go further and demonstrate that if an extension is to be granted then within the period proposed for the extension the situation is more likely than not to be clearer than it is at the time when the meeting should otherwise be convened. 3 It is not enough to just make general assertions that the administrator has done a lot of hard work. The work done should be specified and it also should be noted what improvements are likely to happen in the extended period. 4 The evidence now satisfies both of those criteria and I make orders 1 and 2 in the originating process. ********************** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.