Re Chemeq Ltd; ex parte McMaster

Case [2007] WASC 154

RE CHEMEQ LTD ACN 009 135 264 (Administrators Appointed) (Receivers and Managers Appointed); EX PARTE McMASTER & ANOR [2007] WASC 154



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2007] WASC 154
Case No:COR:91/200715 & 18 JUNE 2007
Coram:LE MIERE J18/06/07
7Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Application granted
B
PDF Version
Parties:BRIAN KEITH McMASTER
DAVID WINTERBOTTOM

Catchwords:
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
Meetings of creditors
Application to extend convening period for meeting of creditors
Whether circumstances justify extension of time
Whether circumstances justify unusually lengthy extension
Turns on own facts

Legislation:
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 435A, s 436A, s 439A, s 447A

Case References:
Australasian Memory Pty Ltd v Brien (2000) 200 CLR 270
BP Australia Ltd v Brown (2003) 46 ACSR 677
Re AFG Insurances Ltd [2002] NSWSC 803

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    IN CHAMBERS
CITATION : RE CHEMEQ LTD ACN 009 135 264 (Administrators Appointed) (Receivers and Managers Appointed); EX PARTE McMASTER & ANOR [2007] WASC 154 CORAM : LE MIERE J HEARD : 15 & 18 JUNE 2007 DELIVERED : 18 JUNE 2007 FILE NO/S : COR 91 of 2007 MATTER : Section 439A(6) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

    Chemeq Ltd ACN 009 135 264 (Administrators Appointed) (Receivers and Managers Appointed)
EX PARTE

    BRIAN KEITH McMASTER
    DAVID WINTERBOTTOM
    Plaintiffs

Catchwords:

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - Meetings of creditors - Application to extend convening period for meeting of creditors - Whether circumstances justify extension of time - Whether circumstances justify unusually lengthy extension - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 435A, s 436A, s 439A, s 447A


(Page 2)



Result:

Application granted

Category: B


Representation:

Counsel:


    Plaintiffs : Mr J L Sher

Solicitors:

    Plaintiffs : Corrs Chambers Westgarth



Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Australasian Memory Pty Ltd v Brien (2000) 200 CLR 270
BP Australia Ltd v Brown (2003) 46 ACSR 677
Re AFG Insurances Ltd [2002] NSWSC 803


(Page 3)

1 LE MIERE J: In this matter the plaintiffs have applied under s 439A(6) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ("the Act") for an order extending the period in which to convene a meeting of creditors of Chemeq Ltd (Administrators appointed) (Receivers and managers appointed) ("the Company"). By s 439A(1) "[T]he administrator of a company under administration must convene a meeting of the company's creditors within the convening period as fixed by subsection (5) or extended under subsection (6)".

2 By virtue of subsection (5)(b) the relevant convening period is 21 days from 30 May 2007, that being the date that the plaintiffs were appointed joint and several administrators of the Company by resolution of directors of the Company pursuant to s 436A of the Act. By s 439A(6) the Court may extend the convening period on an application made with the 21 day period referred to in s (5)(b). This application has been duly made within that time.

3 Nothing in s 439A(6) sets…

Continue reading Re Chemeq Ltd; ex parte McMaster

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Re Chemeq Ltd; ex parte McMaster [2007] WASC 154
Case
[2007] WASC 154
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Court was an application by McMaster, a creditor of Chemeq Ltd, to extend the convening period for a meeting of creditors. McMaster sought an extension beyond the six-month period specified in section 449A of the Corporations Act 2001, arguing that the circumstances of the case warranted such a delay. The primary issue before the Court was whether the circumstances justified an extension of the convening period for the meeting of creditors, and if so, whether the extension should be unusually lengthy.

The Court considered the relevant provisions of the Corporations Act and the case law concerning extensions of convening periods. It noted that the decision to grant an extension lies within the discretion of the Court, and the circumstances of each case must be considered individually. The Court examined the reasons for the delay in convening the meeting and the impact of the delay on the creditors and the company. Ultimately, the Court concluded that the circumstances did justify an extension of the convening period, and granted the application. The Court found that the extension should be unusually lengthy to allow for the resolution of the complex issues in the case.

The Court's decision was based on the specific facts of the case, and the need to ensure that justice was done in the circumstances. The Court granted the application and extended the convening period for the meeting of creditors. The exact duration of the extension was not specified in the text. The Court's decision provides guidance for future cases involving applications to extend convening periods for meetings of creditors.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application granted

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

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.