Aveo Group Limited v State Street Australia Ltd in its capacity as Custodian for Retail Employees Superannuation Pty Ltd (Trustee) [2016] FCAFC 81
Securityholders, under cl 4.2 of the Securityholders Deed and relevant statutory powers, may call meetings and propose resolutions to remove the Advisor as required by cl 13.3(a)(vii) of the Advisory Services Deed; a super majority resolution satisfies the threshold for a special resolution under the Corporations Act; therefore, the appeal fails.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 June 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- ['stapled Entities' 'management Powers' 'securityholder Meetings' 'interpretation of Constitutive Documents' 'declaratory Relief']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether securityholders may call meetings to propose super majority resolutions for removal of the Advisor under the Advisory Services Deed' 'Whether a super majority resolution constitutes a special resolution within the meaning of the Corporations Act']
Ratio Decidendi
Securityholders, under cl 4.2 of the Securityholders Deed and relevant statutory powers, may call meetings and propose resolutions to remove the Advisor as required by cl 13.3(a)(vii) of the Advisory Services Deed; a super majority resolution satisfies the threshold for a special resolution under the Corporations Act; therefore, the appeal fails.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- ['The appeal be dismissed with costs']
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