AMP Capital Investors Ltd & Ors v Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] NSWSC 129

AMP Capital Investors Ltd & Ors v Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] NSWSC 129

Because it was not clear whether an insurance policy existed or whether s 601AG applied, and those opposing reinstatement appeared unwilling to disclose the position, there was a proper and practical purpose in reinstating PBI so that a liquidator could investigate the existence or otherwise of an insurance policy.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 500(2) and S 601 Ah(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) for Reinstatement of a Deregistered Company / Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Application granted.
Legal Topics
['reinstatement of Deregistered Company' 'voluntary Liquidation' 'claims Against Insurers of Deregistered Company' 'practical Purpose for Reinstatement']
['corporations Law'] ['reinstatement of Deregistered Company' 'voluntary Liquidation' 'claims Against Insurers of Deregistered Company' 'practical Purpose for Reinstatement']

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

Application Under S 500(2) and S 601 Ah(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) for Reinstatement of a Deregistered Company / Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether identifying the existence of an insurance policy is a proper and practical purpose of reinstating a deregistered company.' 'Whether the possibility of a direct claim against an insurer under s 601AG of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) made reinstatement unnecessary where the existence or responsiveness of any policy was not known.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because it was not clear whether an insurance policy existed or whether s 601AG applied, and those opposing reinstatement appeared unwilling to disclose the position, there was a proper and practical purpose in reinstating PBI so that a liquidator could investigate the existence or otherwise of an insurance policy.

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

  • ['Orders made in terms of the Short Minutes of Order dated 22 February 2010, initialled by Palmer J and placed with the papers.' 'AMPCI should bear only 50% of the costs of the application.' "Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited, James Duncan Gregg-Mantle, Peter Hiley and Grant Wilton Smallhorn are to pay one...