Onus v Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations [2017] FCA 1498

Onus v Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations [2017] FCA 1498

The second show cause notice was not a valid and effective notice for s 487-10(1) because it was issued while the corporation was still under special administration. On the proper construction of the CATSI Act, the show cause procedure assumes that the Registrar has not yet determined that the corporation is to be under special administration, and the Act did not provide for parallel CATSI Act special administrations. The first separate question was therefore answered no, making it unnecessary to answer the second question.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under S 5 of the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) of a Decision to Place the Corporation in Special Administration and Appoint a Special Administrator / Judgment on Separate Questions
Outcome
The first separate question was answered No; the second separate question was answered Unnecessary to answer.
Legal Topics
['special Administration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations' 'show Cause Notice Procedure' 'validity of Administrative Notice' 'reasonable Period to Respond' 'external Administration']
['corporations' 'administrative Law'] ['special Administration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations' 'show Cause Notice Procedure' 'validity of Administrative Notice' 'reasonable Period to Respond' 'external Administration']

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

Judicial Review Under S 5 of the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) of a Decision to Place the Corporation in Special Administration and Appoint a Special Administrator / Judgment on Separate Questions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the show cause notice issued by the first respondent on 7 August 2017 while the corporation was still in special administration was a valid and effective notice for the purposes of s 487-10(1) of the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth).' 'If the show cause notice was valid, whether the period specified for the corporation to respond was a reasonable period within the meaning of s 487-10(1)(a) of the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The second show cause notice was not a valid and effective notice for s 487-10(1) because it was issued while the corporation was still under special administration. On the proper construction of the CATSI Act, the show cause procedure assumes that the Registrar has not yet determined that the corporation is to be under special administration, and the Act did not provide for parallel CATSI Act special administrations. The first separate question was therefore answered no, making it unnecessary to answer the second question.

Court Disposition

The first separate question was answered No; the second separate question was answered Unnecessary to answer.

Orders

  • ['The separate questions be answered as follows: the show cause notice issued by the first respondent on 7 August 2017 while Gunditj-Mirring Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC was still in special administration was not a valid and effective notice for the purposes of s 487-10(1) of the CATSI Act.' 'The...