Re Jugganort Constructions Pty Ltd (in liquidation) - [2020] VSC 13

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMERCIAL COURT

CORPORATIONS LIST

S ECI 2019 05479

IN THE MATTER of JUGGANORT CONSTRUCTION PTY LTD (in liquidation) (ACN 135 361 787)

BETWEEN:

GREG ANDREWS (in his capacity as the liquidator of Jugganort Constructions Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (ACN 135 361 787))

Plaintiff

---

JUDICIAL REGISTRAR:	Matthews JR
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	On the papers
DATE OF RULING:	31 January 2020
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Jugganort Constructions Pty Ltd (in liquidation)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VSC 13

---

CORPORATIONS – External administration – Application by former administrator for determination of remuneration – Section 60-10(1)(c) of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) (Schedule 2 to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)) – Remuneration approved.

---

The plaintiff has served all parties required to be served with notice of the intention to make this application and no such party opposed it. In such circumstances and in light of the provisions of r 9.2 of the Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 2013, it was considered appropriate to deal with the application in the absence of the public and without the necessity for the plaintiff to attend at Court.

JUDICIAL REGISTRAR:

Introduction
Nature of the application and material relied upon

Jugganort Constructions Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (‘Company’), went into voluntary administration on 23 March 2018 when the Plaintiff, Greg Andrews, and Andrew Juzva (‘Administrators’) were appointed as administrators.[1]
[1]Affidavit of Gregory Stuart Andrews sworn 24 September 2019 (‘First Andrews Affidavit’), [3].

Prior to that time, the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (‘the DCOT’) had issued winding up proceedings in the Federal Court against the Company, which were listed for hearing on 20 April 2014 and adjourned on that date at the request of the Administrators to 4 May 2018.[2]
[2]First Andrews Affidavit, [8].

The administration of the Company came to an end on 4 May 2018, when orders were made by the Federal Court that the Company be wound up and that Mr Andrews be appointed as liquidator of the Company.[3] The Company was wound up prior to the second meeting of creditors in the administration of the Company being held and thus the second meeting did not occur.[4]
[3]First Andrews Affidavit, [16]; Exhibit GSA-03.
[4]First Andrews Affidavit, [15].

By originating process filed 2 December 2019, the Plaintiff applies under the provisions of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) (Schedule 2 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)) (‘Practice Schedule’), for a declaration that he is entitled to remuneration for performing his role as administrator of the Company, an order fixing the cost of that remuneration in the amount of $28,031.30 (plus GST), and an order that his costs of this application be costs in the liquidation of the Company (‘Application’). Rule 9.2 of the Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 2013 (‘Rules’) also governs such applications.

The Application is supported by the following:

(a) the First Andrews Affidavit;

(b) a further affidavit…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Jugganort Constructions Pty Ltd (in liquidation) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2020] VSC 13
Decision Date: 31 January 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Plaintiff, the liquidator of Jugganort Constructions Pty Ltd, sought an order approving his remuneration of $28,031.30 (plus GST) for his role as administrator of the Company. The court considered the relevant statutory provisions and principles in approving the remuneration of an external administrator. The court found that the Plaintiff had made out a prima facie case that the remuneration claimed was reasonable and that the evidence provided was sufficient to enable potential objectors to review the amounts claimed. The court concluded that the amount of the remuneration claimed was reasonable and approved the Plaintiff's remuneration in the amount of $28,031.30 plus GST for the work performed during the administration of the Company. The court also ordered that the Plaintiff's costs of the Application be costs in the liquidation of the Company.

Orders