McGrath v Henry Walker Eltin Group Ltd [2005] NSWSC 32

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : McGrath v Henry Walker Eltin Group Ltd [2005] NSWSC 32

HEARING DATE(S) : 4 February 2005

JUDGMENT DATE : 4 February 2005

JURISDICTION : Equity

JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J

DECISION : Orders made under s 447A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

CATCHWORDS : CORPORATIONS [176] - Voluntary administration - Jurisdiction and powers of Court - General power to make orders - Power to make such order as it thinks appropriate - Order to permit meetings to be held simultaneously to satisfy requirements of s 436E(1) and s 449C(4) - Order that meeting may be held earlier than during the five day period immediately after the convening period.

LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 436E(1), 447A, 449C(4)

Anthony Gregory McGrath, Scott Bradley Kershaw, Joseph David Hayes & Shaun Robert Fraser (in their capacity as Voluntary Administrators of Henry Walker Eltin Group Ltd (Administrators Appointed)) (Ps) PARTIES : Henry Walker Eltin Group Ltd (Administrors Appointed) (D)

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 0000/05

M B Oakes SC (Ps) COUNSEL : No appearance (D)

Kemp Strang (Ps) SOLICITORS : No appearance (D)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION :

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION

HAMILTON J

FRIDAY, 4 FEBRUARY 2005

1346/05 ANTHONY GREGORY McGRATH & ORS v HENRY WALKER ELTIN GROUP LTD (Administrators Appointed) JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: This is an application under s 447A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ("the CA"). It arises in circumstances where administrators were recently appointed to a group of companies and then resigned, necessitating the appointment of replacement administrators under s 449C of the CA. 2 Mr Oakes SC for the plaintiffs, the new administrators, submits that the course of events that has occurred means that there are two overlapping obligations in force as to meetings, one under s 436E(1) and one under s 449C(4) of the CA. This is probably correct and certainly there is a clear argument that it is correct. 3 In those circumstances the plaintiffs ask for orders under s 447A of the CA that will justify meetings to meet the requirements of both sections be held next Tuesday, 8 February 2005, and that those meetings may be held concurrently, so that the statutory agenda stipulated for each may be dealt with at the same time. 4 This seems to me an entirely reasonable course. The orders prayed for in the originating process appear fit to achieve this result and I propose to make orders in terms of the appropriate prayers.