Legal Research
Cases
Re Pindan Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed)

Re Pindan Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed)

Case [2021] WASC 347 13 September 2021

Corporate Group

Administrators' Liability

Liquidators' Authority

Refinancing Agreements

Deed of Company Arrangement

Convening Period

Administrators' Indemnity

Corporate Law & Governance

Insolvency Law

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

CITATION:   RE PINDAN GROUP PTY LTD (ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTED) AND ORS [2021] WASC 347
CORAM:   STRK J
HEARD:   13 SEPTEMBER 2021
DELIVERED          :   13 SEPTEMBER 2021
PUBLISHED           :   18 OCTOBER 2021
FILE NO/S:   COR 102 of 2021
MATTER:   IN THE MATTER OF PINDAN GROUP PTY LTD (ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTED) AND OTHERS

EX PARTE
VINCENT ANTHONY SMITH, COLBY RHYS O'BRIEN AND SAMUEL JOHN FREEMAN, as joint and several administrators of PINDAN GROUP PTY LTD (ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTED) ACN 611 922 386, PINDAN ASSET MANAGEMENT PTY LTD (ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTED) ACN 086 747 944 and PINDAN CONTRACTING PTY LTD (ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTED) ACN 120 076 360, and as joint and several liquidators of PINDAN PROJECTS WA PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 611 922 475, PINDAN REALTY PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 009 372 847 and MOSELLE HOLDINGS PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 009 338 318
Plaintiff

Catchwords:

Corporations law - Application by the administrators to further extend the convening period - Application by the administrators to limit their liability under proposed refinance agreements to the extent that such liability can be satisfied out of company assets pursuant to the administrators' indemnity under s 443(D) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - Application by the liquidators for approval to enter into proposed refinance agreements pursuant to s 477(2B) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

Legislation:

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 439A(6), s 447A(1), s 477(2B)

Result:

Applications granted

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff

A J Papamatheos and L Pham

Solicitors:

Plaintiff

Squire Patton Boggs

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

Cameron Shaw and Richard Albarran in their Capacity as Joint and Several Administrators of Home Art Building Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) v Home Art Building Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2016] WASC 274
Flynn v Theobold [2008] WASC 263
In the matter of Nexus Energy Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1041
Jones, Saker, Weaver and Stewart (Liquidators), in the matter of Great Southern Limited (in liq) (Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2012] FCA 1072
Matthew David Woods and Hayden Leigh White as joint and several liquidators of Little Tiger Pty Ltd (In liq) as trustee for the BPH Trust v Little Tiger Pty Ltd (In liq) [2014] WASC 372
Mighty River International Ltd v Hughes [2017] WASCA 152; (2017) 52 WAR 1
Re Bell Group (In liq); Ex parte Woodings [2020] WASC 121
Re GA Listing & Maintenance Pty Ltd (1994) 15 ACSR 308
Re Gothard (No 2) [2015] FCA 401
Re HIH Casualty & General [2001] NSWSC 1186
Re HIH Insurance Group [2001] NSWSC 308
Re Mentha in their capacities as joint and several administrators of the Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd (administrators appointed) [2010] FCA 1469; (2010) 92 ACSR 142
Re Red Lancer Pty Ltd (In liq); Ex parte Bumback [2019] WASC 450
Re Reid Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed); Ex parte Kirman & Bauer [2017] WASC 2019
Re Riviera Group Pty Ltd (Admins Apptd) (Recs and Mgs Apptd) [2009] NSWSC 585; (2009) 72…

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.

Continue reading Re Pindan Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed)

Details

AGLC: Re Pindan Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2021] WASC 347
Case: [2021] WASC 347
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the plaintiffs, who are joint and several administrators and liquidators of various companies within the Pindan group, sought an extension to the convening period for the second meeting of creditors of Pindan Group and Pindan Contracting, and orders to facilitate a proposal that they enter into certain refinance agreements. The court considered the legal principles relevant to extending the convening period and limiting the personal liability of the plaintiffs under the refinance agreements. The court was satisfied that the extension of the convening period was necessary to allow the plaintiffs to assess, develop and negotiate a potential deed of company arrangement proposal, engage the Committees of Inspection, obtain appropriate advice, prepare reports to the creditors and convene the necessary second meeting of creditors. The court also considered the refinance proposal and the liquidators' authority to enter into the proposed refinance agreements. The court found that the proposed arrangements were in the interests of creditors and consistent with the objectives of the Corporations Act, and that the liquidators' contention that the refinancing documentation would not cause undue delay to the liquidations was sound. The court made orders to extend the convening period, limit the plaintiffs' liability under the refinance agreements and authorise the liquidators to enter into the proposed refinance agreements.

Orders