Re Poseidon Nickel Ltd

Case [2024] WASC 516


JURISDICTION     :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION:   RE POSEIDON NICKEL LTD; EX PARTE POSEIDON NICKEL LTD [2024] WASC 516

CORAM:   HILL J

HEARD:   23 DECEMBER 2024 & 7 FEBRUARY 2025

DELIVERED          :   23 DECEMBER 2024 & 7 FEBRUARY 2025

PUBLISHED           :   10 FEBRUARY 2025

FILE NO/S:   COR 181 of 2024

MATTER:   IN THE MATTER OF POSEIDON NICKEL LTD

EX PARTE

POSEIDON NICKEL LTD

Plaintiff


Catchwords:

Corporations - Two inter-conditional schemes of arrangement - Application for orders convening scheme meetings under s 411(1) of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - Independent expert of opinion that proposed schemes are not fair but reasonable and in best interests of securityholders - Whether requirements to order scheme meetings are satisfied - Orders made convening scheme meetings

Corporations - Schemes of arrangement - Whether supplementary disclosure required by plaintiff in relation to announcements made by bidder - Announcements did not alter opinion of independent expert - No impact on schemes

Corporations - Schemes of arrangement - Application for orders approving schemes under s 411(4)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - Orders made approving schemes

Legislation:

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 411, s 412, s 1319
Corporations Regulations 2001 (Cth) sch 8
Supreme Court (Corporations) (WA) Rules 2004 (WA) r 3.2

Result:

Orders made convening scheme meetings
Orders made approving schemes

Category:    B

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr J Healey

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Steinepreis Paganin

Cases referred to in decision:

Re Amcom Telecommunications Ltd [2015] FCA 341

Re APN News & Media Ltd [2007] FCA 770; (2007) 62 ACSR 400

Re Beadell Resources Ltd [2018] WASC 410; (2018) 133 ACSR 600

Re CSR Ltd [2010] FCAFC 34; (2010) 183 FCR 358

Re International Goldfields Ltd [2004] WASC 112

Re Kangaroo Resources Ltd [2018] WASC 327

Re Nzuri Copper Ltd [2019] WASC 189

Re Pacific Energy Limited [2019] WASC 443

Re Schrole Group Ltd [2024] WASC 515

Re Seven Network Ltd [No 3] [2010] FCA 400; (2010) 267 ALR 583

Re SRG Ltd [2018] FCA 1092

Re TASK Group Holdings Ltd [2024] NSWSC 821

Re Wesfarmers Ltd [2018] WASC 308

Re Wesfarmers Ltd [No 2] [2018] WASC 357

HILL J:

  1. Poseidon Nickel Limited (Poseidon) is an Australian public company listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX). On 25 October 2024, Poseidon announced it had entered into a Scheme Implementation Deed (SID) with Horizon Minerals Limited (Horizon) for the implementation of two inter‑conditional schemes.[1] Under the Schemes, it is proposed that Horizon will acquire all issued ordinary shares in Poseidon (Share Scheme), certain unlisted options in Poseidon will be cancelled (Option Scheme) (together, the Schemes), and Poseidon will become a wholly‑owned subsidiary of Horizon and be delisted from the ASX.

    [1] Affidavit of Madeline Sky Ardon filed 11 December 2024 [8], 'MA-1'.

  2. The originating process dated 18 November 2024 came before me for the first court hearing on 23 December 2024. On that date, I ordered the convening of a meeting of Poseidon's Shareholders and a separate meeting of Poseidon's…

Continue reading Re Poseidon Nickel Ltd

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Re Poseidon Nickel Ltd [2024] WASC 516
Case
[2024] WASC 516
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Poseidon Nickel Ltd, where two inter-conditional schemes of arrangement were proposed. The applicants sought orders convening scheme meetings under section 411(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The independent expert had concluded that while the schemes were not fair, they were reasonable and in the best interests of the securityholders. The court was tasked with determining whether the requirements to order the scheme meetings were satisfied.

The primary legal issue was whether the court should convene the scheme meetings given the independent expert's opinion that the schemes were not fair. The court examined the statutory framework and previous case law to assess the adequacy of the independent expert's report and the overall fairness of the schemes. The court found that despite the schemes not being fair, they were reasonable and in the best interests of the securityholders, satisfying the requirements for convening the scheme meetings. The court also considered whether supplementary disclosure was required in relation to announcements made by the bidder, concluding that such announcements did not alter the independent expert's opinion or impact the schemes.

The court ordered the convening of scheme meetings to allow securityholders to vote on the proposed schemes. Additionally, the court approved the schemes under section 411(4)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The court's decision was grounded in the statutory provisions and the expert's assessment, ensuring that the processes were fair and in the best interests of the securityholders.

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.