NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Dr Shanahan v Jatese Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 113 Hearing dates: 21 March 2019 Date of orders: 20 May 2019 Decision date: 20 May 2019 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Bell P at [113]; Emmett AJA at [143] Decision: (1) Appeal dismissed. (2) Appellants to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal. Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – Members' rights and remedies – Oppression – Where conduct is oppressive to, unfairly prejudicial to, or unfairly discriminatory - primary judge found affairs of Canberra Eye Hospital Pty Ltd carried on in a manner oppressive to and unfairly prejudicial to appellants.
VALUATION – Types of property – Shares – Oppression –– primary judge found oppressive conduct - primary judge dismissed claim for relief under s 233 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – appellants claimed that as a consequence of oppressive conduct, appellants sold their shares to interests associated with respondents at less than their fair value – appellants sought order that respondents pay the appellants compensation, representing difference between the fair value of shares and sale price – whether primary judge erred in method of valuation of shares sold by the appellants - whether primary judge erred in failure to include hypothetical income in valuation of shares – whether primary judge erred in taking into account death of surgeon in valuation of shares. Legislation Cited: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Cases Cited: Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; 93 ER 664 Commissioner of Succession Duties (SA) v Executor Trustee and Agency Company of South Australia Ltd (1947) 74 CLR 358; [1947] HCA 10 Coulton v Holcombe (1986) 162 CLR 1; [1986] HCA 33 Dynasty Pty Ltd v Coombs (1995) 59 FCR 122 ES Gordon Pty Ltd v Idameneo (No 123) Pty Ltd (1994) 15 ACSR 536 Foody v Horewood [2007] VSCA 130 Gregory v Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) (1971) 123 CLR 547; [1971] HCA 2 Houghton v Immer (No 155) Pty Ltd (1997) 44 NSWLR 46 HTW Valuers (Central Qld) Pty Ltd v Astonland Pty Ltd (2004) 217 CLR 640; [2004] HCA 54 HTW Valuers (Central Queensland) Pty Ltd v Astonland Pty Ltd (2004) 217 CLR 640; [2004] HCA 54 Kizbeau Pty Ltd v W G & B Pty Ltd (1995) 184 CLR 281; [1995] HCA 4 LJP Investments Pty Ltd v Howard Chia Investments Pty Ltd (No 2) (1990) 24 NSWLR 499 McCartney v Orica Investments Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 337 Mopeke Pty Ltd v Airport Fine Foods Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 153 Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd (2004) 216 CLR 388; [2004] HCA 3 Rankine v Rankine (1995) 124 FLR 340; 18 ACSR 725 Re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd [1986] Ch 658 Sanford v Sanford Courier Service Pty Ltd (1986) 10 ACLR 549 Scottish Co-operative Wholesale Society Ltd v Meyer [1959] AC 324 Smith Martis Cork & Rajan Pty Ltd v Benjamin Corp Pty Ltd [2004] FCAFC 153; (2004) 207 ALR 136 Suttor v Gundowda Pty Ltd (1950) 81 CLR 418 United Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd v Lopmand Pty Ltd (2003) 47 ACSR 514; [2003] NSWSC 910 Water Board v Moustakas (1988) 180 CLR 491; [1988] HCA 12 Whisprun Pty Ltd v Dixon [2003] HCA 48; 200 ALR 447 Texts Cited: The Hon AM Gleeson AC QC, "Finality" Bar News (2013, Winter Edition) 33 Wayne Lonergan, The Valuation of Business, Shares and Other Equity (4th ed, 2003, Allen & Unwin) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Dr Leo Shanahan (First Appellant) Michael Shanahan (Second Appellant) Joan Shanahan (Third Appellant) Dr Stuart Saunders (Fourth Appellant) Christine Saunders (Fifth Appellant) Jatese Pty Ltd ACN 105079436 (First Respondent) Optident Pty Ltd ACN 108697150 (Second Respondent) Canberra Eye Services Pty Ltd ACN 084921862(Third Respondent) Dr Iain Dunlop (Fourth Respondent) Dr Martin Duncan (Fifth Respondent) Dr Gagan Khannah (Sixth Respondent) Representation: Counsel: D Williams SC with S Goodman SC (Appellants) M Ashhurst SC with D Villa SC (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