Lianos v Order of AHEPA NSW Inc (No 2) [2020] NSWCA 304
Section 440D applied because the appeal had not yet been finally resolved and the invited submissions on orders were steps toward final resolution, so leave was required. Leave should be granted because the dispute concerned governance of the Association and final orders would provide certainty in the administration or winding up; the asserted prejudice concerning a possible High Court application or reopening did not justify refusing leave. The proposed substantive orders, with a correction to clause 1(2)(f), fairly reflected the Principal Reasons and should be made, stayed for 21 days.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 November 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Concerning Incorporated Association Governance and Voluntary Administration Moratorium / Application on the Papers for Leave Under Corporations Act 2001 (cth), S 440 D(1)(b), and Final Orders After Reasons for Allowing Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave granted under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 440D(1)(b); appeal allowed; primary judge's orders set aside; declarations and rectification order made; first respondent ordered to pay appellants' costs; orders stayed for 21 days.
- Legal Topics
- ['voluntary Administration' 'moratorium on Proceedings Against Company Under Administration' 'leave to Proceed Under S 440 D' 'final Orders After Appeal Reasons' 'governance and Membership of Incorporated Association' 'rectification of Register of Incorporated Associations']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning Incorporated Association Governance and Voluntary Administration Moratorium / Application on the Papers for Leave Under Corporations Act 2001 (cth), S 440 D(1)(b), and Final Orders After Reasons for Allowing Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether s 440D of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) operated to prevent the Court from making orders to give effect to the conclusions reached in the Principal Reasons.' 'If s 440D applied, whether leave to proceed should be granted under s 440D(1)(b).' 'Whether the Court should make substantive orders or remit the proceedings to the primary judge for formulation of orders and consideration of an application to reopen.' 'Whether the orders proposed by the Dissenting Members reflected the Principal Reasons.']
Ratio Decidendi
Section 440D applied because the appeal had not yet been finally resolved and the invited submissions on orders were steps toward final resolution, so leave was required. Leave should be granted because the dispute concerned governance of the Association and final orders would provide certainty in the administration or winding up; the asserted prejudice concerning a possible High Court application or reopening did not justify refusing leave. The proposed substantive orders, with a correction to clause 1(2)(f), fairly reflected the Principal Reasons and should be made, stayed for 21 days.
Court Disposition
Leave granted under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 440D(1)(b); appeal allowed; primary judge's orders set aside; declarations and rectification order made; first respondent ordered to pay appellants' costs; orders stayed for 21 days.
Orders
- ['Leave is granted to proceed under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 440D(1)(b).' 'Appeal allowed.' "Set aside orders made by the primary judge on 3 October 2019 and, in lieu thereof, make declarations and orders concerning the Association's rules, membership requirements, invalidity of resolutions, rectification of...
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