IMO Colorado Group Limited - [2011] VSC 552

Do Not Send for Reporting
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA		Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMERCIAL AND EQUITY DIVISION

COMMERCIAL COURT

S CI 2011 02947
-and-
S CI 2011 03278

IN THE MATTER OF COLORADO GROUP LIMITED (administrators appointed) (receivers and managers appointed) (ACN 004 327 566)

BETWEEN:

VENTANA PTY LTD (ACN 008 84 129)	Plaintiff
v
COLORADO GROUP LIMITED (administrators appointed) (receivers and managers appointed) (ACN 004 327 566)	Defendant
AND BETWEEN:
S CI 2011 3278
PT LIMITED AS CUSTODIAN OF THE WESTFIELD TRUST (ACN 004 454 666) and for the benefit of Re 1 Limited as responsible entity of the Westfield Retail Trust 1	Plaintiff
v
COLORADO GROUP LIMITED (administrators appointed) (receivers and managers appointed) (ACN 004 327 566)	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	GARDINER AsJ
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	9 August 2011
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	28 October 2011
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	IMO Colorado Group Limited
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2011] VSC 552	Revised 21 November 2011

---

CORPORATIONS – External administration under Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“the Act”) – application by owners of property to enforce rights to possession of premises during administration of company pursuant to s 440C(b) of the Act– grant of leave not likely to materially effect the achievement of the objects of Part 5.3A of the Act – application granted.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiffs	Ms C.M. Kenny SC, with Ms A.L. Robertson	Holding Redlich
For the Administrators of the Defendant	Mr S. Rosewarne	Freehills
For the Receivers	Mr P. Crutchfield SC with	Blake Dawson
Dr O. Bigos

HIS HONOUR:

On 30 March 2011, the defendant (“Colorado”) together with nine associated companies was placed in administration pursuant to Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“the Act”). Salvatore Algeri, Timothy Bryce Norman and David John Frank Lombe were appointed as joint and several administrators of the ten companies. On 13 April 2011, they were also appointed as administrators of a New Zealand company, Colorado Adventurewear Limited (NZ).

On the same day, James Stewart, Brendan Richards and Will Colwell of Ferrier Hodson, Chartered Accountants, were appointed joint and several receivers and managers of the six operating “active” companies in the group, including Colorado.

The group, which is comprised of the ten companies, operates retail and wholesale businesses in Australia and New Zealand under various names including “Colorado”, “Diana Ferrari”, “Jag”, “Mathers” and “Williams”. Colorado is the central trading arm of the group and is the main contracting entity with employees, suppliers, landlords and lenders.

Because the receivers and managers were appointed within the decision period provided for in s 441A of the Act, they presently have the general day-to-day carriage of the operations of Colorado and the business of the active members of the group.

The group owes debts to its primary secured lenders of approximately $440 million which is secured by fixed and floating charges given by each member of the group in favour of ANZ Fiduciary Services Pty Ltd, the security trustee for the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading IMO Colorado Group Limited

Details

AGLC: IMO Colorado Group Limited [2011] VSC 552
Case: [2011] VSC 552
Decision Date: 28 October 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves IMO Colorado Group Limited, which was under external administration, and several property owners who sought to enforce their rights to possession of premises during the administration period. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The property owners argued that their rights to possession should be enforced despite the company's administration, relying on section 440C(b) of the Corporations Act 2001. They contended that granting their application would not materially affect the achievement of the objects of Part 5.3A of the Act, which is primarily concerned with the efficient administration of insolvent companies.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the property owners' rights to possession could be enforced during the company's external administration. The court had to determine if granting the application would likely materially affect the achievement of the objects of Part 5.3A of the Act. The owners argued that their rights to possession were crucial for their businesses and that enforcement would not hinder the administration's primary objectives. The court considered the potential impact on the administration process and the rights of the property owners.

The court found that the grant of leave to the property owners to enforce their rights to possession would not likely materially affect the achievement of the objects of Part 5.3A of the Act. It concluded that the administration's primary objectives, such as maximising the return to creditors and ensuring an efficient process, would not be significantly impacted by the enforcement of the owners' rights. The court was satisfied that the property owners' rights were critical for their businesses and that allowing them to take possession would not hinder the administration's overall goals. Therefore, the court granted the application.

The final orders of the court were that the property owners' application to enforce their rights to possession of the premises during the external administration of IMO Colorado Group Limited was granted. The court's decision recognised the importance of the property owners' rights while ensuring that the administration process remained efficient and effective.

Orders