Jain v Deojill Pty Ltd (In Liq) [2005] FCA 1938

Jain v Deojill Pty Ltd (In Liq) [2005] FCA 1938

The Court was satisfied that it was appropriate to terminate the winding up because the applicant was a contributory of the Company, the Company's creditors and liquidation expenses were to be paid or had been paid, the liquidator did not oppose the application, ASIC did not appear or oppose, and the circumstances explained the winding up and supported restoration of control to the applicant as sole director and secretary.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 482 of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) to Terminate the Winding Up of a Company / Final Orders and Reasons for Judgment
Outcome
Winding up terminated with effect from 2 December 2005; applicant to resume control of the first respondent as sole director and secretary; proceedings otherwise dismissed with no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['termination of Winding Up' 'contributory Application' "liquidator's Costs and Expenses" 'payment of Creditors']
['corporations Law' 'insolvency'] ['termination of Winding Up' 'contributory Application' "liquidator's Costs and Expenses" 'payment of Creditors']

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

Application Under S 482 of the Corporations Act 2001 (cth) to Terminate the Winding Up of a Company / Final Orders and Reasons for Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should make an order under s 482 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) terminating the winding up of Deojill Pty Ltd (In Liquidation).' 'Whether the applicant, as sole shareholder and director, was entitled to bring the application as a contributory of the Company.' 'Whether the circumstances, including payment or proposed payment of creditors and liquidation expenses, made it appropriate to terminate the winding up.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that it was appropriate to terminate the winding up because the applicant was a contributory of the Company, the Company's creditors and liquidation expenses were to be paid or had been paid, the liquidator did not oppose the application, ASIC did not appear or oppose, and the circumstances explained the winding up and supported restoration of control to the applicant as sole director and secretary.

Court Disposition

Winding up terminated with effect from 2 December 2005; applicant to resume control of the first respondent as sole director and secretary; proceedings otherwise dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Upon the undertaking of the Applicant, given by his solicitor, to procure payment to Australian Taxation Office, Energy Australia Limited, and Office of State Revenue on 2 December 2005 by way of loan to the first respondent.' 'Orders, pursuant to sub-section 482(1) of the Corporations Act 2001, that the winding...