Re Investa Listed Funds Management Ltd

The case before the court involved Investa Listed Funds Management Ltd, a responsible entity managing several listed investment funds, and a third party who sought to intervene in the proceedings. The third party, who was not a direct party to the case but had a significant interest in the outcome, requested leave to be heard as an intervenor. The dispute centred on the responsible entity's request for judicial advice under section 63 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW). The responsible entity sought advice on two matters: whether it would be justified to adjourn extraordinary general meetings of security holders to allow time for consideration of resolutions, and whether it would be justified to publish and distribute a supplementary explanatory memorandum to registered unit holders.

The court was tasked with determining whether the third party should be granted leave to intervene in the proceedings and whether the requested judicial advice should be provided. The legal issues included the criteria for granting leave to intervene, the scope of judicial advice under section 63 of the Trustee Act, and the implications of the proposed actions on the rights and interests of the unit holders and other stakeholders.

The court considered the criteria for granting leave to intervene, which included whether the third party had a sufficient interest in the proceedings and whether their participation would assist in the fair and efficient resolution of the issues. The court also examined the scope of judicial advice under section 63 of the Trustee Act, which allows for advice on matters relating to the administration of the trust, including the consideration of resolutions and the distribution of information to unit holders. The court concluded that the third party had a sufficient interest in the proceedings and that their participation would indeed assist in the fair and efficient resolution of the issues. Regarding the judicial advice, the court found that the responsible entity had adequately demonstrated that the proposed actions were in the best interests of the unit holders and were justified under the Trustee Act.

The court granted the third party leave to be heard as an intervenor and provided the requested judicial advice to the responsible entity. This decision allowed the third party to participate in the proceedings and ensured that the responsible entity could proceed with the proposed actions, subject to the conditions set out in the court's decision.