In the matter of OneSteel Manufacturing Pty Limited (administrators appointed) [2017] NSWSC 21

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: In the matter of OneSteel Manufacturing Pty Limited (administrators appointed) [2017] NSWSC 21 Hearing dates: 19, 20 December 2016 Date of orders: 31 January 2017 Decision date: 31 January 2017 Jurisdiction: Equity - Corporations List Before: Brereton J Decision: The court: 1. orders that the originating process be dismissed. 2. declares that the interest of the plaintiff as lessor of the Striker crushing and screening plant referred to in Rental Schedule E2N0157602 and in the spare parts referred to in Rental Schedule E2N0158455 under the rental agreement dated 16 October 2014 between the plaintiff and the first defendant has vested in the first defendant. 3. orders that the plaintiff pay the first and second defendants' costs of the proceedings (including the cross-claim). Catchwords: SECURITIES – personal property – registration – where financing statements did not include grantor's ACN but ABN – whether registrations defective – whether search of PPS register by reference only to grantor's ACN would not reveal the registrations – held, it would not – where defect was such that searchers using one of the authorised modes of search would not discover the registration – whether defect was seriously misleading – held, it was – held, registrations were ineffective

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – legislative power – compulsory acquisition of property – Constitution s 51(xxxi) – whether PPSA s 267 is disapplied pursuant to PPSA s 252B – whether s 267 effects an acquisition of property within s 51(xxxi) – held, it does not effects an acquisition of property, but if it does it is not one within the meaning of s 51(xxxi), because it is not an acquisition for any purpose in respect of which the Commonwealth has power to make laws, but for the grantor's own purposes, and represents a genuine adjustment of the competing rights, claims and obligations between owners of interests in personal property – whether s 267 would be a valid exercise of power under Constitution s 51(xvii) and s 51(xxxvii) if it effected an acquisition of property within the meaning of s 51(xxxi) other than on just terms – held, although the heads of power that support s 267 sufficiently manifest an intention that at least to that extent they not be constrained by the indirect operation of s 51(xxxi), PPSA s 252B nonetheless would disapply a provision of PPSA if effects an acquisition of property within the meaning of s 51(xxxi) other than on just terms regardless of its constitutional validity – PPSA s 252B is not engaged, and so does not affect the operation of s 267.