NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
| IN THE FEDERAL COURT | ) |
| OF AUSTRALIA | ) |
| GENERAL DIVISION | 1 |
| BANKRUPTCY | DISTRICT | 1 |
| OF THE STATE OF | 1 | ||
| WESTERN AUSTRALIA |
|
RE: LYNTON COLIN VIANT
- _
Debtor
EX PARTE: ALDEN SON HALSE and
GARRY JOHN TREVOR
Applicants
| CORAM : | FRENCH J. 8 MAY 1989 |
| F , 7 | : | . | ?Al. | .. |
| EX | TEMPORE | REASONS | FOR | JUDGMENT | I - - A I ~ , R Y |
\'.S'
. \ /
<S
2 _--
I am satisfied that the original Deed of Arrangement in this matter which was executed on or about 10 March 1989 does not reflect the terms of the special resolution insofar as that special resolution makes provision for payment of the trustee's
fees. I am therefore satisfied that it was not entered into in
accordance with the requirements of Part X of the Act.
It is appropriate, in the circumstances, to declare that deed void. I am not prepared to accede to the request of the applicants that after declaring the deed void, I extend time for execution to enable the execution of a supplementary deed which can only be read together with the original deed, declared void by the effect of this order. That, I think, gives rise to potential
difficulties which are quite unnecessary having regard to the ease with which a new deed embodying the amendments proposed by the supplemental deed can be prepared and executed.
The orders I will make are as follows:
1. It is hereby declared that the Deed of Arrangement
- .
entered between the debtor and the applicants on 10
March 1989 is void.
2. That the time for execution of a Deed of Arrangement in this matter be extended to 15 May
1989.
I certify that this and the preceding
page are a true copy of the Ex Tempore
Reasons for Judgment of his Honour
Justice French.
| Associate: L | Date: 5. | " S . |
No appearance for the Debtor
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr K. Dundo
Solicitor for the Applicants: Robinson Cox
Date of Hearing: 8 May 1989
Date of Judgment: 8 May 1989
- AGLC
- Re [1989] FCA 260
- Case
- [1989] FCA 260
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that the original Deed of Arrangement executed on or around 10 March 1989 did not reflect the terms of the special resolution regarding the payment of the trustee's fees. Consequently, the Deed was not executed in accordance with the statutory requirements of Part X of the Act. The court was satisfied that the Deed of Arrangement should be declared void due to this discrepancy. The applicants also requested an extension of time for the execution of a supplementary deed to address the discrepancies. However, the court declined this request, reasoning that it would create unnecessary difficulties and that a new Deed of Arrangement could be easily prepared and executed to reflect the terms of the special resolution.
In conclusion, the court declared the Deed of Arrangement void and extended the time for execution of a new Deed of Arrangement. The orders made by the court were that the Deed of Arrangement entered into on 10 March 1989 was declared void and that the time for execution of a new Deed of Arrangement was extended to 15 May 1989.
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.