In the matter of Australian Property Custodian Holdings Limited (in liquidation) (receivers and managers appointed) (controllers appointed) [2012] NSWSC 1298

In the matter of Australian Property Custodian Holdings Limited (in liquidation) (receivers and managers appointed) (controllers appointed) [2012] NSWSC 1298

The rights and duties in issue in the CTTT proceedings arose from contracts between the parties and the Retirement Villages Act rather than federal law. Any reference to the Corporations Act or BVL's constitution is incidental and does not itself confer federal jurisdiction or deprive the CTTT of jurisdiction. The assertion of s 254K of the Corporations Act as a defence does not create federal jurisdiction where the substantive obligation is contractual or statutory under state law. The applications are not matters 'arising under' a federal law for the purposes of s 76(ii) of the Constitution.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Originating Process for Declaration / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
['jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'federal Jurisdiction' 'retirement Villages' 'contractual Rights and Remedies' 'preference Shares']
['corporations Law' 'equity'] ['jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'federal Jurisdiction' 'retirement Villages' 'contractual Rights and Remedies' 'preference Shares']

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

Originating Process for Declaration / Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the CTTT had jurisdiction to determine proceedings regarding refund of ingoing contributions relating to redeemable preference shares in a retirement village' 'Whether the rights or duties asserted in the CTTT applications arise under or depend on federal law (Corporations Act) or state law (Retirement Villages Act)' 'Whether the raising of a federal statutory defence (Corporations Act s 254K) vests federal jurisdiction in the proceedings']

Ratio Decidendi

The rights and duties in issue in the CTTT proceedings arose from contracts between the parties and the Retirement Villages Act rather than federal law. Any reference to the Corporations Act or BVL's constitution is incidental and does not itself confer federal jurisdiction or deprive the CTTT of jurisdiction. The assertion of s 254K of the Corporations Act as a defence does not create federal jurisdiction where the substantive obligation is contractual or statutory under state law. The applications are not matters 'arising under' a federal law for the purposes of s 76(ii) of the Constitution.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • ['Proceedings dismissed' 'Parties to be heard as to costs.']