Copeland (liquidator) v Odeesh, in the matter of FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2024] FCA 1400

Copeland (liquidator) v Odeesh, in the matter of FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2024] FCA 1400

It is reasonable for the liquidator to employ the procedure in s 108 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) to examine the defendant, given his failure to comply with orders and lack of clarity about the whereabouts or dealings with certain company assets. The court has power under r 41.10(1) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and s 108 of the Civil Procedure Act to make the orders sought in aid of enforcing its previous orders.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Brendan Copeland in his capacity as Liquidator of FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq); Second Plaintiff: FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq); Defendant: Alfredo Bashar Odeesh
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Corporations – Application for Order for Examination of Director and Production of Documents / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Orders for examination of the defendant and production of documents made. Defendant to pay the plaintiffs' costs.
Legal Topics
Orders for Examination, Production of Documents, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Enforcement of Judgments
Corporations Law Corporate Insolvency Civil Procedure Orders for Examination Production of Documents Non Compliance With Court Orders Enforcement of Judgments

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brendan Copeland in his capacity as Liquidator of FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq)

First Plaintiff

FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq)

Second Plaintiff

Alfredo Bashar Odeesh

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Corporations – Application for Order for Examination of Director and Production of Documents / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order for examination of the director and production of documents should be made
  2. 2 Whether the Court has power to make the examination order under the Federal Court Rules 2011 r 41.10(1) and Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) s 108
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's conduct justifies the making of those orders

Ratio Decidendi

It is reasonable for the liquidator to employ the procedure in s 108 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) to examine the defendant, given his failure to comply with orders and lack of clarity about the whereabouts or dealings with certain company assets. The court has power under r 41.10(1) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 and s 108 of the Civil Procedure Act to make the orders sought in aid of enforcing its previous orders.

Court Disposition

Orders for examination of the defendant and production of documents made. Defendant to pay the plaintiffs' costs.

Orders

  • The Interlocutory Application filed by the Plaintiffs on 2 December 2024 be returnable instanter.
  • Order pursuant to rule 41.10(1) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 that the Defendant attend in person before the Court for oral examination on 10 December 2024.