JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CHAMBERS
CITATION: RE WINDIMURRA VANADIUM LTD & MIDWEST VANADIUM PTY LTD; EX PARTE WEAVER [No 3] [2009] WASC 302
CORAM: BEECH J
HEARD: 24 SEPTEMBER 2009
DELIVERED : 24 SEPTEMBER 2009
PUBLISHED : 13 OCTOBER 2009
FILE NO/S: COR 47 of 2009
MATTER :Windimurra Vanadium Ltd ACN 009 131 533 & Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd ACN 113 874 712
EX PARTE
DARREN GORDON WEAVER As Administrator of WINDIMURRA VANADIUM LTD ACN 009 131 533 and MIDWEST VANADIUM PTY LTD ACN 113 874 712 (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (Administrators Appointed)
First-named plaintiffANDREW JOHN SAKER As Administrator of WINDIMURRA VANADIUM LTD ACN 009 131 533 and MIDWEST VANADIUM PTY LTD ACN 113 874 712 (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (Administrators Appointed)
Second-named plaintiffMARTIN JONES As Administrator of WINDIMURRA VANADIUM LTD ACN 009 131 533 and MIDWEST VANADIUM PTY LTD ACN 113 874 712 (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (Administrators Appointed)
Third-named plaintiff
Catchwords:
Corporations - Administration - Meeting of creditors - Convening period - Application for extension - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 439A(6), s 447A
Result:
Application granted
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
First-named plaintiff : Mr G J Archer
Second-named plaintiff : Mr G J Archer
Third-named plaintiff : Mr G J Archer
Solicitors:
First-named plaintiff : Hardy Bowen
Second-named plaintiff : Hardy Bowen
Third-named plaintiff : Hardy Bowen
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Re Windimurra Vanadium Ltd & Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd; Ex Parte Weaver [2009] WASC 71
Re Windimurra Vanadium Ltd & Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd; Ex Parte Weaver [No 2] [2009] WASC 182
BEECH J: (These reasons are an edited version of the reasons delivered extemporaneously on 24 September 2009.)
Background
The plaintiffs are joint and several administrators of two companies, Windimurra Vanadium Ltd and Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd. On 13 March 2009 I ordered an extension of the convening period for the second meeting of creditors of those companies to 30 June 2009. On 25 June 2009 I granted a further extension of the convening period for the second meeting of creditors of those companies to 30 September 2009. The plaintiffs now apply for a further extension in relation to Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd (Midwest). No extension is sought in relation to Windimurra Vanadium Ltd.
The relevant legal principles have been stated in my earlier decisions: Re Windimurra Vanadium Ltd & Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd; Ex Parte Weaver [2009] WASC 71 (first decision) and Re Windimurra Vanadium Ltd & Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd; Ex Parte Weaver [No 2] [2009] WASC 182 (second decision). The background facts can be seen in [13] ‑ [19] of the first decision and [7] ‑ [8] of the second decision.
The evidence in support of the application
The application is supported by an affidavit of Mr Weaver, who is one of the joint and several administrators of the two companies in question. Windimurra Vanadium Ltd and Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd both had administrators appointed to them on…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Windimurra Vanadium Ltd & Midwest Vanadium Pty Ltd; [No 3... 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2009] WASC 302
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to determine whether the applicants had demonstrated sufficient grounds to justify an extension of the convening period. This involved assessing the reasons for the delay and the likelihood of prejudice to creditors if the extension were not granted. The applicants argued that unforeseen circumstances and logistical challenges had caused the delay and that granting the extension would not prejudice the creditors. The court considered the evidence and submissions from both parties, weighing the need for a fair process against the potential detriment to creditors.
After thorough consideration, the court concluded that the applicants had presented a compelling case for an extension of time. The circumstances were deemed exceptional, and the potential prejudice to creditors was minimal. Therefore, the court granted the application, allowing for an extension of the convening period. This decision recognised the unique aspects of the case and the importance of accommodating the specific challenges faced by the applicants.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application granted
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.