Australian Securities & Investment Commission v Radisson Maine Property Group (Australia) Pty Ltd and Anor [2004] NSWSC 949

Australian Securities & Investment Commission v Radisson Maine Property Group (Australia) Pty Ltd and Anor [2004] NSWSC 949

Both defendants are insolvent because their liabilities exceed assets, they have negative cash flow, no realistic means to pay debts as they become due, and no reliable evidence of a future cash injection; therefore, winding up orders are granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Winding Up Application / Judgment
Outcome
Winding up orders granted; liquidator appointed.
Legal Topics
['insolvent Trading' 'winding Up' 'company Insolvency']
['corporations Law' 'equity'] ['insolvent Trading' 'winding Up' 'company Insolvency']

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

Winding Up Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants are insolvent within the meaning of Corporations Act 2001' 'Whether winding up order should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

Both defendants are insolvent because their liabilities exceed assets, they have negative cash flow, no realistic means to pay debts as they become due, and no reliable evidence of a future cash injection; therefore, winding up orders are granted.

Court Disposition

Winding up orders granted; liquidator appointed.

Orders

  • ['Each defendant is to be wound up pursuant to section 459B of the Corporations Act 2001.' 'David John Frank Lombe appointed as liquidator of each defendant pursuant to section 472(1) of the Corporations Act 2001.' "Plaintiff's costs to be costs in the winding up of each defendant."]