Australasian Memory Pty Limited v Brien [2000] HCA 30
Section 447A of the Corporations Law gives courts a broad power to make orders affecting the operation of Part 5.3A in relation to a particular company, including altering how its provisions apply, where necessary to cure procedural irregularities in creditors’ meetings, so long as no unjust interference with accrued or vested rights arises. The appeal against the orders made below to validate procedural defects was therefore dismissed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Australasian Memory Pty Limited; Appellant: B C Amor; Respondent: Richard Campbell Brien; Respondent: [Second Respondent]
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 May 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / High Court Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales (after Court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- External Administration, Deed of Company Arrangement, Powers of Court Under Part 5.3 a, Section 447 a, Irregularities in Creditors' Meetings, Retrospective Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Australasian Memory Pty Limited
Appellant
B C Amor
Appellant
Richard Campbell Brien
Respondent
[Second Respondent]
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales (after Court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Extent of court's power under s 447A of the Corporations Law to make orders affecting operation of Part 5.3A in relation to a company
- 2 Whether s 447A allows orders that alter statutory time periods or retrospectively validate procedural irregularities under Part 5.3A
- 3 Relationship between s 447A and s 1322 of the Corporations Law
Ratio Decidendi
Section 447A of the Corporations Law gives courts a broad power to make orders affecting the operation of Part 5.3A in relation to a particular company, including altering how its provisions apply, where necessary to cure procedural irregularities in creditors’ meetings, so long as no unjust interference with accrued or vested rights arises. The appeal against the orders made below to validate procedural defects was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The second appellant is to pay the respondents' 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