Boral Resources (NSW) Pty Ltd v Urban 8 Constructions Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 217

Boral Resources (NSW) Pty Ltd v Urban 8 Constructions Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 217

The orders of 22 February 2011 should be set aside because Mr Matheson's absence was caused by misleading information about the hearing time and by the matter being heard in a different building from the venue stated in the sealed originating process, making it unjust for the orders to stand; given doubt about Mr Matheson's standing under s 471A, the court acted of its own motion under its inherent jurisdiction to preserve the integrity of its proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Corporations Winding Up Proceedings; Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside Winding Up Order, Liquidator Appointment Order and Related Costs Order Made in the Defendant's Absence
Outcome
Winding up order set aside
Legal Topics
['winding Up Order' 'setting Aside Orders Made in Absence of a Party' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 R 36.16' 'inherent Jurisdiction' 'leave to Represent a Company']
['corporations' 'civil Procedure'] ['winding Up Order' 'setting Aside Orders Made in Absence of a Party' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 R 36.16' 'inherent Jurisdiction' 'leave to Represent a Company']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Corporations Winding Up Proceedings; Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside Winding Up Order, Liquidator Appointment Order and Related Costs Order Made in the Defendant's Absence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the winding up order and related orders made on 22 February 2011 in the defendant's absence should be set aside." "Whether circumstances beyond the defendant's mere absence made it unjust for the orders to stand." "Whether the court should act of its own motion under its inherent jurisdiction despite doubt about the applicant's standing."]

Ratio Decidendi

The orders of 22 February 2011 should be set aside because Mr Matheson's absence was caused by misleading information about the hearing time and by the matter being heard in a different building from the venue stated in the sealed originating process, making it unjust for the orders to stand; given doubt about Mr Matheson's standing under s 471A, the court acted of its own motion under its inherent jurisdiction to preserve the integrity of its proceedings.

Court Disposition

Winding up order set aside

Orders

  • ['Orders made by the registrar on 22 February 2011, being the winding up order in respect of Urban 8 Constructions Pty Ltd, the order appointing a liquidator of that company and the related costs order, were set aside.' 'The originating process was directed to be listed before the registrar at 9.00am on Monday next.']