In the matter of Australasian Barrister Chambers Pty Ltd (in liquidation)

Australasian Barrister Chambers Pty Ltd, in liquidation, was the applicant in the proceedings. The respondent, who was a court-appointed receiver over the applicant's assets, contended that the applicant was in contempt of court for breaching an undertaking not to deal with the assets and for frustrating the receiver's functions. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central legal issues were whether the applicant breached its undertaking by granting a lease of the assets and whether the applicant was in contempt by frustrating the receiver’s functions.

The applicant had undertaken not to deal with the assets, but it claimed to have granted a parol lease of the assets before giving the undertaking and executed a written lease after the undertaking ceased to have effect. The court held that the applicant did not breach the undertaking by granting the parol lease, as the lease was granted before the undertaking was given. However, the court found that the applicant was in contempt by frustrating the receiver’s functions by executing the written lease, as it was executed after the undertaking had ceased to have effect. The court also considered the costs, noting that the successful party relied on evidence that could have been brought to the attention of the court and the other party on earlier occasions. The court found that an order should be made as to costs.

The final orders of the court were that the applicant was in contempt of court for frustrating the receiver’s functions, and the applicant was ordered to pay costs to the receiver. The court also ordered that the applicant's interlocutory application be dismissed.