Endocoal Limited, in the matter of Endocoal Limited (No 2) [2013] FCA 412
The Court was satisfied all statutory and procedural requirements for approval of the scheme were met, that the conditions precedent (apart from the Court's approval) were satisfied, no objections were lodged, and the scheme was fair and reasonable to shareholders. Therefore, approval was granted.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Endocoal Limited (ACN 132 183 281)
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 09 May 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Corporate Scheme of Arrangement Approval / Second Hearing; Approval
- Outcome
- Scheme of arrangement approved.
- Legal Topics
- Scheme of Arrangement, Approval Process
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Endocoal Limited (ACN 132 183 281)
Plaintiff
Procedural Posture
Corporate Scheme of Arrangement Approval / Second Hearing; Approval
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether all procedural and substantive requirements for approval of the scheme of arrangement under s 411 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) were satisfied
- 2 Whether the scheme should be approved by the court
Ratio Decidendi
The Court was satisfied all statutory and procedural requirements for approval of the scheme were met, that the conditions precedent (apart from the Court's approval) were satisfied, no objections were lodged, and the scheme was fair and reasonable to shareholders. Therefore, approval was granted.
Court Disposition
Scheme of arrangement approved.
Orders
- Scheme of arrangement between Endocoal Limited and holders of fully paid ordinary shares approved pursuant to s 411(4)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
- Plaintiff to lodge a copy of the approved scheme with ASIC at the time of lodging a copy of the orders.
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