Woodgate, in the matter of Bell Hire Services Pty Ltd (in liq)

The case of Woodgate, in the matter of Bell Hire Services Pty Ltd (in liq), involves an application by the liquidator, Mr Woodgate, for directions pursuant to s 479(3) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and s 63 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW). The insolvent company, Bell Hire Services Pty Ltd, was the corporate trustee of the Vercoe Family Trust, and the sole purpose of the trust was to carry on the business of the company. The application seeks directions regarding the liquidator’s remuneration, the distribution of the trust’s assets, and the payment of costs associated with the application and the petitioning creditor. The central legal issue was whether the liquidator was justified in treating the assets and liabilities of the insolvent company as those of the trust, and if so, whether it was appropriate for the liquidator’s remuneration, the costs of this application, and the costs of the petitioning creditor to be paid out of the trust’s assets.

The court considered the evidence presented, including the affidavits of Mr Woodgate and Fiona Adele Reynolds, and the supporting documents. The court noted that Bell Hire Services Pty Ltd had entered into the trust deed establishing the Vercoe Family Trust on the day after its incorporation, and that the trust’s tax return for the 2013 financial year indicated that the company was the trustee for the trust. The court also considered the fact that the company maintained two bank accounts in its name as trustee of the Vercoe Family Trust, and that invoices directed payments to those accounts. Based on this evidence, the court found that the company did indeed act as trustee for the Vercoe Family Trust, and that it was appropriate for the liquidator to treat the company’s assets and liabilities as those of the trust.

The court accepted that the liquidator would be justified in distributing the trust’s assets in the manner proposed, and that it was appropriate for the liquidator’s remuneration and the costs of the application and the petitioning creditor to be paid out of the trust’s assets. The court made the directions sought by the liquidator, including the payment of $25,503.50 (plus GST) in respect of the liquidator’s administration of the trust, and the reimbursement of GIO’s costs of obtaining the winding up order and the payment of the liquidator’s costs of the application. The court also noted that the liquidator could be paid up to $28,053.85 by way of remuneration, subject to the approval of the Court.

In summary, the court accepted the liquidator’s application for directions and found that it was appropriate for the liquidator to treat the assets and liabilities of the insolvent company as those of the Vercoe Family Trust. The court made the directions sought by the liquidator, including the payment of the liquidator’s remuneration, the reimbursement of the petitioning creditor’s costs, and the payment of the liquidator’s costs of the application.