Stephen Ross Debnam v Stonehaus Pty Ltd

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Stephen Ross Debnam v Stonehaus Pty Ltd [2021] QSC 306

PARTIES:

STEPHEN ROSS DEBNAM

(applicant)

v

STONEHAUS PTY LTD
ACN 624 326 263

(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BS 3192 of 21

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application on the papers

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

On the papers (26 November 2021)

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

JUDGE:

Brown J

ORDER:

The order of the Court is that:

1.   Pursuant to section 60-16 of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations), the remuneration of Mr Leon Lee as the former provisional liquidator of Stonehaus Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) ACN 624 326 263 is fixed in the sum of $14,960.00 plus GST.

2.   Mr Leon Lee’s costs of this application form part of the costs and expenses in the provisional liquidation of Stonehaus Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) ACN 624 326 263. 

CATCHWORDS:

CORPORATIONS – WINDING UP – LIQUIDATORS – REMUNERATION – where a provisional liquidator was appointed – where the provision liquidator applies for approval of his remuneration

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) sch 2 and s 473(10)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) sch 1A
Re: Barokes Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) [2020] VSC 555, considered
Venetian Nominees Pty Ltd v Conlon (1998) 20 WAR 96, cited

SOLICITORS:

Rose Litigation Lawyers for the applicant

1. Mr Leon Lee, a provisional liquidator, was appointed by this Court pursuant to an order made on 22 April 2021.

2. Mr Lee seeks approval of his remuneration in the sum of $14,960.00 plus GST.  The affidavit material supports compliance with r 9.3 of the Corporations Proceedings Rules.[1]That rule provides for an application being made by a provisional liquidator of a company for a determination under section 60-16(1) of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations),[2] of the remuneration the provisional liquidator is entitled to receive. 

   [1]Schedule 1A of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld).

   [2]Schedule 2 to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

3. The affidavit material demonstrates that the interlocutory affidavit has been served more than 21 days before the filing of the interlocutory application on the five largest creditors of the company and each member of the company whose shareholder represents at least 10 per cent of the issued capital of the company.  No objections were made by any of those served.[3] 

   [3]CFI 17 at [36] and [37].

4. The Court is to have regard to whether the remuneration is reasonable taking into account any or all of the matters set out in r 60–12 of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations). 

5. Given the provisional liquidator (now the liquidator)[4] did not receive any notice of objection, the provisional liquidator, pursuant to r 9.3(5)(b) of the Corporations Proceedings Rules, endorsed the interlocutory application with a request that the application be dealt with in the absence of the public and without any attendance by or on behalf of the provisional liquidator and that the application may be so dealt with.

   [4]Pursuant to an order of 30 April 2021.

6. In support of the…