Re Feltham, Paul Richard Ex Parte Double Bay Newspapers Pty Ltd & Ors [1996] FCA 234

Re Feltham, Paul Richard Ex Parte Double Bay Newspapers Pty Ltd & Ors [1996] FCA 234

Rule 85A applied the Part IV meeting provisions, including s64Y(2), to the Part X creditors' meeting, and nothing in s201 made those notice requirements inapplicable. Written notice of the adjourned meeting of 21 April 1995 was therefore required. No notice was given to Champion, the fax sent 75 minutes before the meeting did not refer to the meeting, and there was no substantial compliance. In the context of prior correspondence, communications and assurances, Champion was deprived of an opportunity to consider its position and make submissions about other creditors' voting rights. No discretionary consideration justified refusing relief, so the Deed should be declared void under...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 April 1996
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application for a Declaration Under S222 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) That a Part X Deed of Arrangement Is Void / Federal Court of Australia General Division Reasons for Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application granted; the Deed of Arrangement should be declared void under s222(2)(a).
Legal Topics
['part X Deed of Arrangement' "creditors' Meetings" 'adjourned Meeting Notice' "right to Vote at Creditors' Meeting" 's222 Declaration That Deed Is Void' 'application of Part IV Meeting Procedures to Part X Meetings']
['bankruptcy' 'insolvency'] ['part X Deed of Arrangement' "creditors' Meetings" 'adjourned Meeting Notice' "right to Vote at Creditors' Meeting" 's222 Declaration That Deed Is Void' 'application of Part IV Meeting Procedures to Part X Meetings']

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

Bankruptcy Application for a Declaration Under S222 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (cth) That a Part X Deed of Arrangement Is Void / Federal Court of Australia General Division Reasons for Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether notice was required for a meeting adjourned pursuant to s201 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth).' 'Whether failure to notify Champion of the adjourned meeting of 21 April 1995 rendered the meeting invalid and justified declaring the Deed of Arrangement void under s222.' 'Whether the failure to notify was merely an inadvertent omission or involved non-compliance with an anticipated course of conduct.' 'Whether discretionary considerations, including the interests of creditors, justified refusing a declaration that the Deed was void.']

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 85A applied the Part IV meeting provisions, including s64Y(2), to the Part X creditors' meeting, and nothing in s201 made those notice requirements inapplicable. Written notice of the adjourned meeting of 21 April 1995 was therefore required. No notice was given to Champion, the fax sent 75 minutes before the meeting did not refer to the meeting, and there was no substantial compliance. In the context of prior correspondence, communications and assurances, Champion was deprived of an opportunity to consider its position and make submissions about other creditors' voting rights. No discretionary consideration justified refusing relief, so the Deed should be declared void under...

Court Disposition

Application granted; the Deed of Arrangement should be declared void under s222(2)(a).

Orders

  • ['The Deed should be declared void under s222(2)(a).' 'The parties were directed to bring in Short Minutes to give effect to the reasons.']