James v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2018] NSWCA 41

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: James v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2018] NSWCA 41 Hearing dates: 2 February 2018 Decision date: 15 March 2018 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]; Leeming JA and Sackville AJA at [46] Decision: Appeal dismissed with costs. Catchwords: JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – the appellant gave four guarantees to the first respondent, ANZ, in respect of indebtedness to ANZ of various companies – judgment entered by consent against the appellant for in excess of $13 million – receivers alleged to have sold company assets at undervalue – appellant not entitled to have the shortfall in receipts treated as wholly or partially satisfying his judgment – the rule against double recovery or double satisfaction considered – s 420A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) considered Legislation Cited: Corporate Law Reform Act 1992 (Cth) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 9, 180-184, 420A Property Law Act 1974 (Qld), s 85 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), s 52 Cases Cited: Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Ltd (1993) 177 CLR 485; [1993] HCA 15 Baxter v Obacelo Pty Ltd (2001) 205 CLR 635; [2001] HCA 66 Buckeridge v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 654; [1981] HCA 62 Byrne v Australian Airlines Ltd (1995) 185 CLR 410; [1995] HCA 24 Castellan v Electric Power Transmission Pty Ltd (1967) 69 SR (NSW) 159 Cuckmere Brick Co Ltd v Mutual Finance Ltd [1971] Ch 949 D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid (2005) 223 CLR 1; [2005] HCA 12 Fortson Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (2008) 100 SASR 162; [2008] SASC 49 GE Capital Australia v Davis (2002) 180 FLR 250; [2002] NSWSC 1146 Investec Bank (Australia) Limited v Glodale Pty Ltd (2009) 24 VR 617; [2009] VSCA 97 James v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2016] NSWSC 833 James v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 216 Jovanovic v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (2004) 87 SASR 570; [2004] SASC 61 Kennedy v De Trafford [1897] AC 180 Leerdam v Noori (2009) 227 FLR 210; [2009] NSWCA 90 Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Ltd (1998) 196 CLR 494; [1998] HCA 69 Mijac Investments Pty Ltd v Graham (No 2) [2009] FCA 773; 72 ACSR 684 Morris v Robinson (1824) 3 B & C 196; 107 ER 706 Northern Territory v Mengel (1995) 185 CLR 307; [1995] HCA 65 O'Connor v SP Bray Ltd (1937) 56 CLR 464; [1937] HCA 18 Registrar-General (New South Wales) v Behn (1981) 148 CLR 562; [1981] HCA 36 Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 516; [2001] HCA 68 Sovar v Henry Lane Pty Ltd (1967) 116 CLR 397; [1967] HCA 31 Thompson v Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd (1996) 186 CLR 574; [1996] HCA 38 Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 507; [2015] HCA 28 Ultimate Property Group Pty Ltd v Lord (2004) 60 NSWLR 646; [2004] NSWSC 114 United Australia Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd [1941] AC 1 Westfield Management Ltd v AMP Capital Property Nominees Ltd (2012) 247 CLR 129; [2012] HCA 54 Williams v Frayne (1937) 58 CLR 710; [1937] HCA 16 Texts Cited: Queensland Law Reform Commission, A Bill to Consolidate, Amend, and Reform the Law Relating to Conveyancing, Property, and Contract and to Terminate the Application of Certain Imperial Statutes (Report No 16, February 1973) Category: Principal judgment Parties: David Andrew James (Appellant) Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (First Respondent) David Paul Merryweather and Greg Hall both in their personal capacities as Receivers and Managers of each of TLT Nominees Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (in liquidation) and Newcastle Liquor Wholesalers Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (in liquidation) (Second Respondents) Representation: Counsel: D F Jackson QC / J Baird (Appellant) I M Jackman SC / R M Foreman (Respondents)