Chief Commissioner of State Revenue v Howell Developments Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 195

Chief Commissioner of State Revenue v Howell Developments Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 195

As the winding-up order had not been entered, the Court has power under Part 40 r 9(1) to set it aside; given the defendant's solvency and satisfaction of the plaintiff's debt with no other creditors pressing, the Court's discretion should be exercised to set aside the order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Corporate Insolvency / Application to Set Aside Winding Up Order
Outcome
Winding up order set aside; proceedings dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['winding Up' 'stay of Proceedings' 'setting Aside Orders' 'proof of Solvency']
['corporations Law' 'equity'] ['winding Up' 'stay of Proceedings' 'setting Aside Orders' 'proof of Solvency']

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

Corporate Insolvency / Application to Set Aside Winding Up Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court has power to set aside an unentered winding-up order' 'Whether it is justified to set aside the winding-up order']

Ratio Decidendi

As the winding-up order had not been entered, the Court has power under Part 40 r 9(1) to set it aside; given the defendant's solvency and satisfaction of the plaintiff's debt with no other creditors pressing, the Court's discretion should be exercised to set aside the order.

Court Disposition

Winding up order set aside; proceedings dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Order that the orders of the court made by Registrar Wearne on 1 February 2005 be set aside.' 'Proceedings dismissed.' 'No order as to costs.']