NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: In the matter of Australasian Barrister Chambers Pty Ltd (in liquidation) [2017] NSWSC 245 Hearing dates: 10 March 2017 Decision date: 10 March 2017 Jurisdiction: Equity - Corporations List Before: Black J Decision: Order that the Respondents deliver to the Applicant's solicitors all certificates of title in their possession power or control for the land entrusted to the Applicant as court-appointed receiver. Order that the Respondents pay the Applicant's costs of the application on the indemnity basis, as agreed or as assessed. Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – Receivers, controllers and managers –whether Court has power to order delivery up of title documents to court-appointed receiver – whether anticipated challenge to sale of land by receiver is a reason to refuse to put the receiver in possession of certificates of title to the land.
PROCEDURE – Costs – where Respondents' conduct imprudent in frustrating performance of receiver's duties, necessitating the application – where Respondents' defence of the application proceeded on an avoidable misapprehension of the law – whether an indemnity costs order should be made – whether costs should be made payable forthwith. Cases Cited: - Ames v Trustees of the Birkenhead Docks (1855) 20 Beav 355; 52 ER 630 - Griffith v Griffith (1751) 2 Ves Sen 401; 28 ER 256. - Hall (as receiver and manager of Homan Industries Pty Ltd) v Homan (Supreme Court of Queensland, McKenzie J, unreported, 4 April 2000) - Kirk v Wirrie Nominees Pty Ltd (1995) ATPR 41-446 - Lane v McConochie [2006] FMCA 376 - Penning v Steel Tube Supplies Pty Ltd (1988) 18 FCR 568 - Re Solomon; Ex parte Reid (1986) 10 FCR 423 Texts Cited: - J D Heydon, M J Leeming and P G Turner, Meagher, Gummow & Lehane's Equity: Doctrines and Remedies, 5th ed, 2014. - J O'Donovan, Company Receivers and Administrators, looseleaf. Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: The Owners – Strata Plan No 21574 (Plaintiff) Australasian Barrister Chambers Pty Ltd (Defendant) David Henry Sampson (Applicant on this Interlocutory Process) ABCD Corporation Pty Ltd (First Respondent on this Interlocutory Process) Derek Minus (Second Respondent on this Interlocutory Process) Representation: Counsel: R D Marshall (Applicant) S C Ipp (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