In the matter of Metal Storm Ltd (subject to Deed of Company Arrangement) [2014] NSWSC 1458

In the matter of Metal Storm Ltd (subject to Deed of Company Arrangement) [2014] NSWSC 1458

The proposed amendments to expand the costs orders were refused because orders 6 and 7 were intended to cover only costs referable to particular issues on which ANZ Trustees succeeded or to the ASOF Cross-Claim. Extending them to costs of the proceedings, reserved costs, trial costs, or the 23 July 2014 hearing would be unnecessary and potentially confusing, particularly where the further hearing produced mixed results.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Corporations List; Consequential Orders / Submissions as to Orders and Costs Following Prior Judgments in the Proceedings
Outcome
Declarations made, ASOF Cross-Claim dismissed, and costs orders made with costs of all issues in respect of liens and indemnities reserved.
Legal Topics
['deed of Company Arrangement' 'trustee Directions Under Secured Notes' "voting at Creditors' Meetings" 'cross Claim Dismissal' 'consequential Costs Orders']
['corporations Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['deed of Company Arrangement' 'trustee Directions Under Secured Notes' "voting at Creditors' Meetings" 'cross Claim Dismissal' 'consequential Costs Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Division Corporations List; Consequential Orders / Submissions as to Orders and Costs Following Prior Judgments in the Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether proposed amendments to the form of costs orders foreshadowed in the prior judgment should be made.' 'Whether costs orders should extend to costs of the proceedings, reserved costs, costs of the trial, and the further hearing on 23 July 2014.' 'Whether costs orders should remain limited to costs referable to specified issues and the ASOF Cross-Claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments to expand the costs orders were refused because orders 6 and 7 were intended to cover only costs referable to particular issues on which ANZ Trustees succeeded or to the ASOF Cross-Claim. Extending them to costs of the proceedings, reserved costs, trial costs, or the 23 July 2014 hearing would be unnecessary and potentially confusing, particularly where the further hearing produced mixed results.

Court Disposition

Declarations made, ASOF Cross-Claim dismissed, and costs orders made with costs of all issues in respect of liens and indemnities reserved.

Orders

  • ['Declare that, pursuant to section 283HA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the First Defendant was and is not required to comply with the December Direction, the August Direction, and the February Direction.' 'Declare that, pursuant to section 283HA of the Corporations Act, the First Defendant is the creditor...