Re Yeeda Pastoral Company Pty Ltd (Subject to Deed Of Company Arrangement) (ACN 094 819 717)

The Yeeda Pastoral Company Pty Ltd was the subject of an application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) for leave to transfer shares under section 444GA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The Federal Court was tasked with deciding whether the plaintiffs had discharged the onus of establishing that the shares had no residual value, and if the court could admit expert evidence based on hearsay. The case also considered whether offers could be used to determine the value of an asset, and what orders should be made in the circumstances.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the plaintiffs had demonstrated that the shares had no residual value and whether the court could admit expert evidence based on hearsay. The court had to determine whether offers could be used to establish the value of an asset, and what orders should be made in the context of the case. The court also had to consider the admissibility of valuation evidence that was considered "stale," and whether the court had discretion to admit such evidence.

The court found that the plaintiffs had not discharged the onus of proving that the shares had no residual value, as there was no admissible evidence of the value of a significant asset of the company. The court also held that the valuation evidence was "stale" and could not be relied upon. However, the court held that it had discretion to admit expert evidence based on hearsay in certain circumstances, and that offers could be used to determine the value of an asset. The court ultimately decided that the best course of action was to make orders that would facilitate the sale of the company's assets and the distribution of the proceeds to creditors.

The court made orders that would facilitate the sale of the company's assets and the distribution of the proceeds to creditors. The court also made orders that would allow for the transfer of the company's shares, and that would provide for the appointment of a liquidator. These orders were made in the interest of justice and to ensure that the company's creditors were treated fairly.