Re NSW Tennis Association Limited (No.2)

Case [2004] NSWSC 807
CITATION: Re NSW Tennis Association Limited (No.2) [2004] NSWSC 807
HEARING DATE(S): Application in chambers
JUDGMENT DATE:
31 August 2004
JURISDICTION:
Equity
JUDGMENT OF: Campbell J
DECISION: Register of Company Charges amended
CATCHWORDS: CORPORATIONS - corporate finance - amendment of particulars of charge - appropriate form of order
CASES CITED: Re NSW Tennis Association Limited [2004] NSWSC 175; (2004) 49 ACSR 83

PARTIES :

 New South Wales Tennis Association Limited - Plaintiff
FILE NUMBER(S): SC 1113/04
COUNSEL:
SOLICITORS: Parish Patience Immigration Lawyers - Plaintiff

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
EQUITY DIVISION
EQUITY LIST

CAMPBELL J

TUESDAY 31 AUGUST

1113/04 RE NSW TENNIS ASSOCIATION LIMITED (No. 2)

JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: I gave judgment in this matter on 15 March 2004: Re NSW Tennis Association Limited [2004] NSWSC 175; (2004) 49 ACSR 83. In that judgment, I decided that a charge given on 1 August 1908 by the New South Wales Lawn Tennis Association Limited (“the Company”) secured no debt which was enforceable against the Company as at 15 March 2004. The evidence before me included the results of an ASIC search of the Company, including the portion of the Register of Company Charges applicable to it. In that extract, it appeared as though the word “type” was a heading, which had a blank alongside it, in the same row as the word “type” appeared. To give effect to the decision, I ordered that the entry in the Register of Charges be amended by:

          “alongside the heading “Type” in the Register the following words be inserted:
              “charge securing no debt enforceable against the company as at 15 March 2004.””

2 It has now emerged that an order in that form is incapable of being registered. That is because the word “type” is not intended to be an independent heading, but rather is part of a composite heading, namely “form type”. As well, that composite heading was intended to relate a column, not a row. Further, it appears that, since the time of the search which was before me in evidence on 15 March 2004, the column heading has been altered, so that it now reads “SEL type”.

3 It appears that the intent of my original order can be adequately achieved by the following orders, which I make:

          1. Order made 15 March 2004 is revoked.
          2. Concerning charge number 217361 entered in the Australian Register of Company Charges given by New South Wales Tennis Association Ltd to Estate of Late Sir Daniel Cooper, chargee,
              (i) order that the following words be entered as a partial release of the charge:
              “the charge does not secure any debt enforceable against the Company as at 15 March 2004.”
      **********

Last Modified: 09/03/2004

Details
AGLC
Re NSW Tennis Association Limited (No.2) [2004] NSWSC 807
Case
[2004] NSWSC 807
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application by the liquidator of the NSW Tennis Association Limited, who sought an order to amend the particulars of a registered charge held by the ANZ Bank. The liquidator argued that the original charge did not adequately describe the subject matter of the security, thereby affecting the priority of creditors. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issue was whether the Court had the authority to amend the particulars of the charge to reflect the true nature of the security interest, even if it meant departing from the form prescribed by the Personal Property Securities Act. The Court had to consider the balance between the need for certainty in corporate finance and the equitable principle of ensuring that the true intent of the parties was given effect.

The Court held that while the form of the charge was generally important, it was not determinative of the Court's power to amend the particulars if necessary to accurately reflect the security interest. The Court found that it had the inherent jurisdiction to make orders that would achieve justice in the circumstances, and it was appropriate to amend the particulars to correct any inaccuracies or omissions that might affect the priority of creditors. The Court made an order amending the particulars of the charge to reflect the true nature of the security held by the ANZ Bank.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.