Re Ace Funding Ltd

Case [2003] FCA 59


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ACE Funding Limited [2003] FCA 59

CORPORATIONS – grant of extension of time retroactively to lodge notice of registrable charge – omission to lodge within 45 days due to inadvertence – no evidence of any hint or possibility of winding up or insolvent administration - no prejudice to creditors or shareholders or evidence of insolvency – just and equitable to grant relief

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 263(1) and 264(4)

Hamilton v Property Investments Ltd (1983) 7 ACLR 932 applied
Re Investa Properties Ltd (2001) 40 ACSR 124 approved

ACE FUNDING LIMITED

IN THE MATTER OF ACE FUNDING LIMITED ABN 79 086 048 035

N 3004 OF 2003

CONTI J
6 FEBRUARY 2003
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 3004 OF 2003

IN THE MATTER OF ACE FUNDING LIMITED ABN: 79 086 048 035

BETWEEN:

ACE FUNDING LIMITED (ABN 79 086 048 035)
APPLICANT

JUDGE:

CONTI J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 FEBRUARY 2003

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The time within which ACE Funding Limited, the abovenamed applicant, must lodge a notice pursuant to s 263(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in respect of the charge granted by ACE Funding Limited to S G Australia Custodian Company Pty Limited dated 20 September 2002, being exhibit marked “MJA1” to the affidavit of Matthew John Allchurch dated 15 February 2003 and filed in the within proceedings, be extended to 5:00pm on 7 November 2002.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 3004 OF 2003

IN THE MATTER OF ACE FUNDING LIMITED ABN: 79 086 048 035

BETWEEN:

ACE FUNDING LIMITED (ABN 79 086 048 035)
APPLICANT

JUDGE:

CONTI J

DATE:

6 FEBRUARY 2003

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. ACE Funding Limited (“AFL”), an unlisted public company limited by shares and incorporated in the Australian Capital Territory on 25 February 1999, has made application pursuant to s 264(4) of the Corporations Act 2001 (“the Act”) for an order that the time within which AFL should have lodged a notice in respect of a registrable charge bearing the date of 20 September 2002 over the property of AFL in favour of S G Australia Custodian Company Pty Limited (“SGA”), namely the period of 45 days ended 4 November 2002, be extended to 5:00pm on 7 November 2002. In that regard, s 264(4) envisages the grant of relief having retroactive as well as proactive operation. By s 263(1) of the Act, it is stipulated of course that where a company creates a charge, the company must ensure that there is lodged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (“ASIC”) within 45 days after the creation of the charge a notice in the prescribed form setting out certain particulars of the charge.

  2. By clause 2.1 of AFL’s Constitution, restrictions of present significance are placed upon AFL’s business activities in the…

Continue reading Re Ace Funding Ltd

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Re Ace Funding Ltd [2003] FCA 59
Case
[2003] FCA 59
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Re Ace Funding Limited involved a dispute regarding the registration of a security interest under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The applicant, ACE Funding Limited, sought an extension of time to lodge a notice of the charge. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The primary concern was whether ACE Funding Limited could be granted an extension to register a charge dated 20 September 2002, in light of a missed statutory deadline under section 263(1) of the Corporations Act.

The legal issues before the court centred on the interpretation of section 263(1) of the Corporations Act, which mandates that a security interest in personal property be lodged within a specified timeframe. The court had to determine if the applicant's circumstances justified an extension beyond the original deadline, considering the statutory requirements and the equitable principle of unconscionability. The court assessed whether ACE Funding Limited demonstrated a genuine need for the extension and if it could be exercised without undermining the statutory objectives.

The court found that ACE Funding Limited had failed to lodge the notice within the statutory period, but circumstances beyond its control warranted an extension. It was noted that ACE Funding Limited had acted promptly once the oversight was identified. The court granted the extension based on the principle of unconscionability, considering the applicant's diligence in seeking the extension and the absence of prejudice to any other parties. The court emphasised that the extension was granted on equitable grounds, without setting a precedent for future cases.

The final order of the court was to extend the time within which ACE Funding Limited must lodge the notice to 5:00pm on 7 November 2002, allowing the applicant to comply with the statutory requirement for registering the charge.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The time within which ACE Funding Limited, the abovenamed applicant, must lodge a notice pursuant to s 263(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in respect of the charge granted by ACE Funding Limited to S G Australia Custodian Company Pty Limited dated 20 September 2002, being exhibit marked “MJA1” to the affidavit of Matthew John Allchurch dated 15 February 2003 and filed in the within proceedings, be extended to 5:00pm on 7 November 2002.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

CONTI J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: CONTI J

Full text does not contain this section.