Lombe, in the matter of Babcock and Brown Ltd (in liq)
Case
•
[2022] FCA 957
•18 August 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Lombe, in the matter of Babcock and Brown Ltd (in liq) [2022] FCA 957
[2022] FCA 957
18 August 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Babcock and Brown Limited (in liquidation), the applicant, Paul Riik, and Bookarelli Pty Ltd sought orders to inspect an affidavit and the transcript of a proceeding before the Registrar which had resulted in examination orders. The respondents, David Lombe in his capacity as Liquidator of Babcock and Brown Limited and others, opposed the application. The primary issue before the court was whether the applicants were entitled to inspect the affidavit and transcript. The court found that the applicants did not have an arguable case and, even if they did, the affidavit was unlikely to assist in determining the application. The court also found that the applicants had not demonstrated that they were entitled to the relief sought in their interlocutory process.
The court noted that the nature of a review hearing meant that the affidavit would be for the Liquidator to file and serve the evidence on which he intended to rely. The material before the Registrar may ultimately have no role to play in such an application. The court concluded that the applicants had not made out their entitlement to the relief sought in their interlocutory process, and the prayers for relief should be dismissed. The applicants were ordered to pay the Liquidator’s costs of their application for the relief sought in paragraphs 9 and 10 of their interlocutory process. The balance of the interlocutory process was listed for a case management hearing.
The court noted that the nature of a review hearing meant that the affidavit would be for the Liquidator to file and serve the evidence on which he intended to rely. The material before the Registrar may ultimately have no role to play in such an application. The court concluded that the applicants had not made out their entitlement to the relief sought in their interlocutory process, and the prayers for relief should be dismissed. The applicants were ordered to pay the Liquidator’s costs of their application for the relief sought in paragraphs 9 and 10 of their interlocutory process. The balance of the interlocutory process was listed for a case management hearing.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Corporate Law & Governance
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Corporate Liquidation
-
Examination Orders
-
Abuse of Process
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Re QSD Inv Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) [2025] WASC 229
Cases Citing This Decision
6
Re QSD Inv Pty Ltd (in Liquidation)
[2025] WASC 229
Re Mervyn Jonathan Kitay As Liquidator of T&L Produce Marketing
[2022] WASC 299
Mentha v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2023] FCA 667
Cases Cited
15
Statutory Material Cited
4
Grant-Taylor v Babcock & Brown Ltd (in liq)
[2015] FCA 149
Grant-Taylor v Babcock & Brown Ltd (in liq)
[2015] FCA 149