In the matter of Idylic Solutions Pty Ltd as trustee for Super Save Superannuation Fund and others
Case
•
[2016] NSWSC 907
•30 June 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
In the matter of Idylic Solutions Pty Ltd as trustee for Super Save Superannuation Fund and others [2016] NSWSC 907
[2016] NSWSC 907
30 June 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The liquidators of several unregistered managed investment schemes, Idylic Solutions Pty Ltd as trustee for Super Save Superannuation Fund and others, applied for various directions under section 601EE(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The managed investment schemes had accepted investments from international business companies. The liquidators sought directions to determine whether they were justified in treating the individuals who established the international business companies as the true investors rather than the companies themselves. The liquidators also sought directions on proceeding with a pari passu distribution among investors in the schemes in proportion to their unit holdings, subject to investors first bringing into hotchpot any "returns" received. Furthermore, the liquidators requested various other directions.
The court examined whether the administrators of the schemes held investor funds on express or resulting trust for the scheme investors. The court was required to decide whether the directions sought should be made. The court considered the nature of the investments, the relationship between the individuals and the international business companies, and the equitable principles that might apply in distributing the assets of the schemes.
The court concluded that the liquidators were justified in treating the individuals who established the international business companies as the true investors. This was based on the evidence that the individuals controlled the companies and the investments were ultimately derived from their personal assets. The court also found that the liquidators were justified in proceeding on the basis of a pari passu distribution, subject to the investors first bringing into hotchpot any returns received. The court determined that the equitable principles of a resulting trust applied, and the administrators held the investor funds on resulting trust for the scheme investors. The directions sought by the liquidators were ultimately made.
The court made the directions sought by the liquidators, including treating the individuals who established the international business companies as the true investors and proceeding with a pari passu distribution subject to the investors first bringing into hotchpot any returns received. The court also made orders for the liquidators to distribute the assets of the schemes in accordance with the directions.
The court examined whether the administrators of the schemes held investor funds on express or resulting trust for the scheme investors. The court was required to decide whether the directions sought should be made. The court considered the nature of the investments, the relationship between the individuals and the international business companies, and the equitable principles that might apply in distributing the assets of the schemes.
The court concluded that the liquidators were justified in treating the individuals who established the international business companies as the true investors. This was based on the evidence that the individuals controlled the companies and the investments were ultimately derived from their personal assets. The court also found that the liquidators were justified in proceeding on the basis of a pari passu distribution, subject to the investors first bringing into hotchpot any returns received. The court determined that the equitable principles of a resulting trust applied, and the administrators held the investor funds on resulting trust for the scheme investors. The directions sought by the liquidators were ultimately made.
The court made the directions sought by the liquidators, including treating the individuals who established the international business companies as the true investors and proceeding with a pari passu distribution subject to the investors first bringing into hotchpot any returns received. The court also made orders for the liquidators to distribute the assets of the schemes in accordance with the directions.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Corporate Law & Governance
Legal Concepts
-
Unregistered Managed Investment Schemes
-
Pari Passu Distribution
-
Trust
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Markopoulus v Marco [2020] WASC 79
Cases Citing This Decision
16
Re Courtenay House Capital Trading Group Pty Ltd (in liq)
[2020] NSWSC 780
Re Courtenay House Capital Trading Group Pty Ltd (in liq)
[2020] NSWSC 780
Cases Cited
25
Statutory Material Cited
1
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hobbs
[2012] NSWSC 1276
Re Purchas
[2011] NSWSC 91
Re MF Global Australia Ltd (in liq)
[2012] NSWSC 994