MLW Investments v Tacsum [2006] NSWSC 1256

MLW Investments v Tacsum [2006] NSWSC 1256

The defendant did not establish sufficient grounds for removal of the receiver. The receiver's investigation of partnership assets and liabilities was not shown to be outside his role, his reporting of alleged fraud and contact with police did not justify removal on the material before the Court, and his refusal to disclose the plaintiff's offer was consistent with the sale procedure contemplated by the orders. Because little work remained and judicial control over any disputed sale was available through an Associate Justice, removal was not necessary. An account on the basis of wilful default was not justified by the evidence, and the unsuccessful defendant was ordered to pay the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Partnership Dissolution and Winding Up; Application Concerning Removal of Receiver / Hearing of Notice of Motion; Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Receiver not removed; Notice of Motion otherwise dismissed except for directions; defendant ordered to pay costs.
Legal Topics
['dissolution and Winding Up of Partnership' 'removal of Court Appointed Receiver' 'accounts on Basis of Wilful Default' 'costs of Unsuccessful Notice of Motion']
['partnership' 'receivers' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['dissolution and Winding Up of Partnership' 'removal of Court Appointed Receiver' 'accounts on Basis of Wilful Default' 'costs of Unsuccessful Notice of Motion']

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

Partnership Dissolution and Winding Up; Application Concerning Removal of Receiver / Hearing of Notice of Motion; Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the court-appointed receiver of the partnership should be removed' 'Whether accounts should be ordered on the basis of wilful default' 'Whether directions should be made for filing of accounts' 'What costs orders should be made on the unsuccessful Notice of Motion']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant did not establish sufficient grounds for removal of the receiver. The receiver's investigation of partnership assets and liabilities was not shown to be outside his role, his reporting of alleged fraud and contact with police did not justify removal on the material before the Court, and his refusal to disclose the plaintiff's offer was consistent with the sale procedure contemplated by the orders. Because little work remained and judicial control over any disputed sale was available through an Associate Justice, removal was not necessary. An account on the basis of wilful default was not justified by the evidence, and the unsuccessful defendant was ordered to pay the...

Court Disposition

Receiver not removed; Notice of Motion otherwise dismissed except for directions; defendant ordered to pay costs.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is directed to make to the receiver, by 2:00pm on 21 November 2006, in writing, any offer that it wishes to make for the purchase of the receivership business.' 'The Notice of Motion is otherwise dismissed.' 'The defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the plaintiff of the Notice of Motion on a...