Grain Technology Australia Ltd v Rosewood Research Pty Ltd (No 2)

In the case of Grain Technology Australia Ltd v Rosewood Research Pty Ltd (No 2), the plaintiff, Grain Technology Australia Ltd, sought approval of a Deed of Settlement and Release which had been negotiated between the parties. The dispute involved the administration of certain property by receivers and managers appointed by the court. The defendants, Rosewood Research Pty Ltd and its directors, opposed the plaintiff's application for approval of the Deed of Settlement and Release, arguing that certain conditions required approval from the Court, which had not been sought by the receiver.

The court was required to determine whether the receiver had acted within the scope of the court's direction when entering into the Deed of Settlement and Release, and whether the plaintiff was entitled to have the costs of the cross-claim paid out of the companies’ assets. The court also needed to consider the principles governing directions to receivers, judicial advice, and administration proceedings.

The court found that the receiver had not sought judicial advice or approval of the Court in the terms of the Deed of Settlement and Release, but the court approved the directions given to the receiver, considering the circumstances of the case. The court also found that the costs of the cross-claim were appropriate and should be paid out of the companies’ assets, as the cross-claim would not have otherwise been brought by the company against its directors, and the claim largely stood on the work underpinning the primary claim in the proceedings. The court ultimately resolved the proceedings by agreeing that a further deed be entered, excluding the requirement for approval by the Court.