Winterbottom, in the matter of Ballistic Hydraulic Hose and Fittings Pty Ltd (in liq)

In the case of In the Matter of Ballistic Hydraulic Hose and Fittings Pty Ltd (in liq), the plaintiffs sought various orders to facilitate the continuation of the liquidation of a number of companies. The companies involved were either under court-appointed liquidation or creditors' voluntary liquidation, and the plaintiffs sought orders for the removal and appointment of liquidators, as well as an order to synchronise the half-yearly reports. The primary legal issues in the case were whether the court had the power to make orders under section 473(7) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) even when the liquidation and appointment of liquidators were made by another superior court, and whether it was appropriate to have joint and several liquidators appointed from the same firm to ensure continuity in the liquidation.

The court found that it did indeed have the power to make orders under section 473(7) even when the liquidation and appointment of liquidators were made by another superior court, as per the cases of Naudi and Re Ambridge Investments. The court also determined that it was appropriate to have joint and several liquidators appointed from the same firm to ensure continuity in the liquidation, following the principles established in Naudi and Free & Ors. As such, the court granted the plaintiffs' applications for the removal and appointment of liquidators, as well as the application for the synchronisation of half-yearly reports. The court also granted the plaintiffs' application for leave to be appointed and act as liquidators, despite the potential conflict of interest arising from the fact that they were partners of KordaMentha and KordaMentha may be owed $5,000 or more for works undertaken in the liquidation of the companies. The court ordered that the costs of the application would be borne by KordaMentha.

The court's final orders included the removal of the existing liquidators, the appointment of the plaintiffs as liquidators for the relevant companies, and the extension of the period for lodging the liquidator's accounts and statements. The court also declared that any actions required or authorised by the Act to be done by the liquidator of each of the companies were to be done by any one or more of the second plaintiff and/or the third plaintiff. The court noted that the plaintiffs would notify the Australian Securities and Investments Commission of the making of these orders.