ASIC v Barrack Mortgage Managers Pty Ltd

Case [1999] NSWSC 272


CITATION: ASIC v Barrack Mortgage Managers Pty Limited; ASIC v Credit Alliance Pty Limited; ASIC v W. G. Herle Pty Limited [1999] NSWSC 272
CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity Division
FILE NUMBER(S): 1642/99; 1643/99; 1644/99
HEARING DATE(S): 30 March 1999
JUDGMENT DATE:
30 March 1999

PARTIES :


Australian Securities & Investments Commission (P)
Barrack Mortgage Managers Pty Limited (D)
Credit Alliance Pty Limited (D)
W. G. Herle Pty Limited (D)
JUDGMENT OF: Master McLaughlin
COUNSEL : Mr. R. J. Weber (P)
No appearance for the Defendant
SOLICITORS: Jan Redfern (P)
CATCHWORDS:
ACTS CITED: Corporations Law
DECISION:

- 5 -

SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
EQUITY DIVISION

MASTER McLAUGHLIN

Tuesday, 30 March 1999

1642/99 - AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION -v- BARRACK MORTGAGE MANAGERS PTY LIMITED

1643/99 - AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION v CREDIT ALLIANCE PTY LIMITED

1644/99 - AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION v W G HERLE PTY LIMITED

1 MASTER: In each of these three matters the Australian Securities and Investments Commission has filed a summons seeking the winding up of the defendant upon the ground set forth in section 461(1)(k) of the Corporations Law, that ground being that the Court is of opinion that it is just and equitable that the company be wound up.
2 I have been taken to the judgment of his Honour Justice Finn in the Federal Court of Australia in Australian Securities Commission v A S Nominees Limited (1995) 13 ACLC 1822. I would respectfully agree with the view expressed by his Honour in that decision that the just and equitable ground has an appropriate role to serve as an instrument of investor protection.
3 The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has a role of protecting the investing public as a matter of public interest. It therefore has the standing to bring about a winding up of a company upon the just and equitable ground.
4 His Honour in that case said that a court entertaining an application by the Australian Securities Commission (the statutory predecessor to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission), grounded on considerations of public interest, had to evaluate the reasons put forward by the Commission, in order to form a view on whether they did afford sufficient reasons for making a winding up order on the just and equitable ground.
5 In the instant case, none of the three defendants has seen fit to appear. The evidence discloses a consistently series of breaches of the Corporations Law in the case of each of the companies. Those breaches include improper dealings with moneys raised from the public, failure to keep or to produce appropriate records, and failure to provide that degree of basic public accountability as to the operations of each of the companies as is required under the Corporations Law.
6 It is clear from the evidence that one Damien Parkes, an undischarged bankrupt, has been involved in the management of all three companies. Indeed, it is clear that he has had the control of the three companies. The persons who nominally have been directors of the companies have, in fact, been denied the capacity to operate as such, and have on occasions even been refused by Mr Parkes access to the books and records of the companies.
7 At the present time none of the companies has any directors, none of the companies has filed annual reports. The records of Credit Alliance Pty. Limited are false. That company has ceased to trade, and its assets either have been or are to be transferred to W G Herle Pty. Limited, leaving Credit Alliance Pty. Limited only with debts. The records of Credit Alliance Pty. Limited are being destroyed. The plaintiff has been denied access to such books and records of Credit Alliance Pty. Limited as may exist. None of the three companies appears to have been operating at its registered office or to have been trading at its principal place of business.
8 It appears that the aforesaid Damien Parkes, an undischarged bankrupt, has been using for his own purposes moneys raised from the public by one or more of the three companies.
9 I am in entire agreement with the submissions made on behalf of the plaintiff that it is in the public interest that each of these three companies be wound up forthwith, so that the public can be protected from the conduct which has been perpetrated by the aforesaid Damien Parkes. Further, that an official liquidator be appointed, who will thoroughly investigate the affairs of the companies, to ascertain their assets and liabilities, to ascertain the whereabouts of their books and records, to ascertain whether any transactions into which the companies have purported to enter are capable of being challenged, and, most importantly, to ascertain whether any further or other breaches of the Corporations Law or of any other law have been committed by any person who has been involved in the management or control of the companies.
10 I propose to make an order in each case for the winding up of the company and for the appointment of an official liquidator.
11 In each matter I make the following orders:
1. I make an order as in paragraph 1 in the Notice of Motion filed by the plaintiff on 10 March 1999.
        2. I order that the defendant be wound up pursuant to section 461(1)(k) of the Corporations Law .
        3. I order that Steven John Sherman of Ferrier Hodgson, Level 17, 2 Market Street, Sydney, be appointed liquidator of the defendant.
        4. I order that the defendant pay the costs of the plaintiff.

12 The exhibits should remain with the Court file.
I certify that this and the preceding
pages are a true copy of the reasons for
judgment of Master McLaughlin

Dated 30 March 1999
Associate
Mark Provera
**********
Last Modified:
Details
AGLC
Oceanic Life Limited v HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited [1999] NSWSC 272
Case
[1999] NSWSC 272
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) filed a summons seeking the winding up of three companies: Barrack Mortgage Managers Pty Limited, Credit Alliance Pty Limited, and W. G. Herle Pty Limited, on the basis that it was just and equitable to do so under section 461(1)(k) of the Corporations Law. The defendants did not appear before the court, and the evidence presented by ASIC showed a series of breaches of the Corporations Law by all three companies. These breaches included improper handling of public funds, failure to maintain appropriate records, and a lack of accountability. The companies were effectively controlled by an undischarged bankrupt, Damien Parkes, who had denied the nominal directors their roles and access to company records. None of the companies had filed annual reports, and Credit Alliance Pty Limited had ceased trading, with its assets being transferred to W. G. Herle Pty Limited.

The court was required to determine whether the public interest was sufficiently served to justify the winding up of the companies. The court referenced the Federal Court's decision in Australian Securities Commission v A S Nominees Limited (1995) 13 ACLC 1822, which affirmed the role of the just and equitable ground in investor protection. Given the evidence of ongoing breaches of the Corporations Law and the mismanagement by Parkes, the court found that it was in the public interest to wind up the companies to protect the public from further harm.

The court concluded that ASIC had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the winding up of each company, and ordered that an official liquidator be appointed to investigate the companies' affairs, ascertain their assets and liabilities, and determine if any further breaches of the law had occurred. The court made orders for the winding up of each company and appointed Steven John Sherman as liquidator, with the defendants to pay ASIC's costs. The exhibits were to be retained with the court file.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.