In the matter of Gia Firenze Investments Pty Limited [2013] NSWSC 99
Ms Hughes was a person aggrieved because, as director and sole shareholder, the deregistration adversely affected rights of value or potential value, including the ability of the Company to pursue claims in existing Supreme Court proceedings. It was just to reinstate the Company because the deregistration resulted from an oversight, reinstatement was sought to maintain the proceedings, there was no suggestion of insolvency or prejudice to any person or the public interest, and ASIC did not oppose reinstatement on conditions. It was also just to validate steps taken in the related proceedings between deregistration and reinstatement. Bryen and Ord Minnett had a proper interest in...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 20 February 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under Corporations Act 2001 (cth) S 601 AH for Reinstatement of a Deregistered Company and Validation of Steps Taken After Deregistration / Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Order for reinstatement of registration. Plaintiff to pay costs of ASIC and costs of specified non-parties.
- Legal Topics
- ['reinstatement of Deregistered Company' 'person Aggrieved by Deregistration' 'validation of Acts Between Deregistration and Reinstatement' 'non Party Costs' 'leave to Be Heard Under Supreme Court (corporations) Rules 1999 (nsw) R 2.13']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application Under Corporations Act 2001 (cth) S 601 AH for Reinstatement of a Deregistered Company and Validation of Steps Taken After Deregistration / Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether Ms Hughes was a person aggrieved by the deregistration of Gia Firenze Investments Pty Limited for the purposes of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 601AH(2).' 'Whether it was just that Gia Firenze Investments Pty Limited be reinstated.' 'Whether steps taken in Supreme Court of New South Wales Proceedings 2011/229629 between deregistration and reinstatement should be validated under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 601AH(3).' 'Whether the Court could impose conditions on reinstatement requiring payment of costs incurred by non-parties in considering the reinstatement application.' 'Whether unusual and special circumstances warranted an order that Ms Hughes pay the costs of Bryen Services Pty Limited, Mark Kendrick Bryen and Ord Minnett Limited of appearing to seek costs.']
Ratio Decidendi
Ms Hughes was a person aggrieved because, as director and sole shareholder, the deregistration adversely affected rights of value or potential value, including the ability of the Company to pursue claims in existing Supreme Court proceedings. It was just to reinstate the Company because the deregistration resulted from an oversight, reinstatement was sought to maintain the proceedings, there was no suggestion of insolvency or prejudice to any person or the public interest, and ASIC did not oppose reinstatement on conditions. It was also just to validate steps taken in the related proceedings between deregistration and reinstatement. Bryen and Ord Minnett had a proper interest in...
Court Disposition
Order for reinstatement of registration. Plaintiff to pay costs of ASIC and costs of specified non-parties.
Orders
- ['Pursuant to Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 1999 (NSW) r 2.13(1)(c), Bryen Services Pty Limited ACN 118 511 167, Mark Kendrick Bryen and Ord Minnett Limited ACN 002 733 048 were granted leave to be heard without becoming parties.' 'The Australian Securities and Investments Commission reinstate the registration...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment