Coeclerici Asia (Pte) Ltd v Gujarat NRE Coke Limited [2013] FCA 1395

Coeclerici Asia (Pte) Ltd v Gujarat NRE Coke Limited [2013] FCA 1395

Because the receivers considered a sale of each parcel of shares remained achievable and useful but further time was required, and because uncertainty over the continuing appointment and powers of the receivers should not be left unresolved, the Court varied Order 4(iii)(A) made on 7 August 2013 to extend the time for sale to 31 March 2014 or such later date as the Court may fix, while protecting the respondents by granting liberty to apply to discharge or vary that order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Relisted Hearing of Applicant's Interlocutory Application Seeking Amended Interlocutory Relief, Including Variation of Previous Orders Concerning Receivers' Sale of Shares
Outcome
Order 4(iii)(A) made on 7 August 2013 was amended to extend the time for sale of the shares; leave to amend the interlocutory application and related procedural directions were granted; remaining claims were directed to be determined on the papers; costs of the listing were reserved.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Application' 'variation of Orders' 'receivership' 'freezing Orders' 'costs' 'sale of Shares']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['interlocutory Application' 'variation of Orders' 'receivership' 'freezing Orders' 'costs' 'sale of Shares']

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

Interlocutory Application / Relisted Hearing of Applicant's Interlocutory Application Seeking Amended Interlocutory Relief, Including Variation of Previous Orders Concerning Receivers' Sale of Shares

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should have leave to amend its Interlocutory Application filed on 2 December 2013.' 'Whether the time within which receivers were authorised to sell shares under Order 4 made on 7 August 2013 should be extended to 31 March 2014.' "Whether the respondents' request for an adjournment should prevent immediate variation of the power of sale order." "Whether the applicant's remaining claims for lump sum costs, use of share sale proceeds to satisfy costs orders, and release from part of its freezing order undertaking should proceed by directions and determination on the papers."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the receivers considered a sale of each parcel of shares remained achievable and useful but further time was required, and because uncertainty over the continuing appointment and powers of the receivers should not be left unresolved, the Court varied Order 4(iii)(A) made on 7 August 2013 to extend the time for sale to 31 March 2014 or such later date as the Court may fix, while protecting the respondents by granting liberty to apply to discharge or vary that order.

Court Disposition

Order 4(iii)(A) made on 7 August 2013 was amended to extend the time for sale of the shares; leave to amend the interlocutory application and related procedural directions were granted; remaining claims were directed to be determined on the papers; costs of the listing were reserved.

Orders

  • ['Subparagraph (iii)(A) of Order 4 made by Foster J on 7 August 2013 was amended by replacing the words "within four (4) months of the date of this order" with "by 31 March 2014 or by such later date as the Court may fix".' 'Leave was granted to the applicant to amend its Interlocutory Application filed on 2...