Treasury Wine Estates Vintners Ltd v Garrett [2016] FCA 715

Treasury Wine Estates Vintners Ltd v Garrett [2016] FCA 715

The defendants did not have any security interest over the plaintiffs' assets capable of registration under the PPSA and the foundation asserted by the defendants, being a contractual indemnity in the Settlement Deed, was insufficient to ground such an interest. The purported appointment of Mr Garrett as managing controller was invalid due to lack of legal foundation and his status as an undischarged bankrupt.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Treasury Wine Estates Vintners Limited; Second Plaintiff: Treasury Wine Estates Limited; Third Plaintiff: Foster's Group Pty Ltd; Fourth Plaintiff: SABMiller Beverage Investments Pty Limited; First Defendant: Andrew Morton Garrett; Second Defendant: Oenoviva (UK & Ireland) Pty Ltd; Third Defendant: Oenoviva (China) Pty Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Registrar of Personal Property Securities
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Originating Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Relief granted to plaintiffs; registrations to be removed; defendants restrained; costs awarded to plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Personal Property Securities, Registration of Security Interests, Injunctions, Validity of Appointment of Controller
Commercial Law Corporations Law Insolvency Law Personal Property Securities Registration of Security Interests Injunctions Validity of Appointment of Controller

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Treasury Wine Estates Vintners Limited

First Plaintiff

Treasury Wine Estates Limited

Second Plaintiff

Foster's Group Pty Ltd

Third Plaintiff

SABMiller Beverage Investments Pty Limited

Fourth Plaintiff

Andrew Morton Garrett

First Defendant

Oenoviva (UK & Ireland) Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Oenoviva (China) Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Registrar of Personal Property Securities

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants held a registrable security interest over the plaintiffs' personal property under the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the appointment of the first defendant as 'managing controller' was valid
  3. 3 Whether the registrations on the Personal Property Securities Register should be removed

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants did not have any security interest over the plaintiffs' assets capable of registration under the PPSA and the foundation asserted by the defendants, being a contractual indemnity in the Settlement Deed, was insufficient to ground such an interest. The purported appointment of Mr Garrett as managing controller was invalid due to lack of legal foundation and his status as an undischarged bankrupt.

Court Disposition

Relief granted to plaintiffs; registrations to be removed; defendants restrained; costs awarded to plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Declaration that the appointment of the first defendant as 'managing controller' was invalid.
  • Order for Registrar to remove specified security interest registrations from the PPS Register.