Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Piggott Wood & Baker (A Firm) (No 7)

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) sought directions from the Federal Court of Australia in relation to an unregistered managed investment scheme administered by Piggott Wood & Baker (A Firm). ASIC was the liquidator of the Piggott Wood & Baker Run-out Mortgage Business, and the dispute involved the handling of unclaimed monies held by the liquidator. ASIC applied for an order under section 601EE of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to mandate the payment of these unclaimed monies to ASIC, to be managed under Part 9.7 of the Act. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the statutory provision allowed for such an order, and if so, how the unclaimed monies should be dealt with.

The court examined the relevant statutory provisions and the context of ASIC's role as liquidator. It found that the unclaimed monies should indeed be treated as if they were undistributed and managed under Part 9.7 of the Corporations Act. This interpretation aligned with the objectives of the legislation, which aim to protect investors and ensure the proper administration of investment schemes. The court concluded that ASIC, as the liquidator, was entitled to the requested directions to facilitate the proper management of the unclaimed monies. Consequently, the court ruled that the liquidator should be released from his duties and the liquidation finalised once the conditions of the orders were met.

In light of the court's decision, the liquidator was authorised to place advertisements in specified newspapers to notify any investors of the opportunity to claim their unclaimed monies within a set timeframe. Unclaimed monies were to be transferred to ASIC for management under Part 9.7 of the Corporations Act. The liquidator was also granted permission to destroy all related books and records after fulfilling certain conditions, and ASIC was ordered to pay the liquidator's costs from the scheme's assets. The final order released the liquidator from liability for his conduct, subject to potential revocation if fraud or material concealment was proven.