Onefone Australia Pty Limited v One.Tel Limited (In Liquidation) [2010] NSWSC 586
The Court determined that the interlocutory processes filed by the special purpose liquidator and the applicants raised substantial appellate questions about the validity and procedural fairness of Barrett J's orders, justifying removal of those interlocutory proceedings to the Court of Appeal under r 1.21, and discharged the confidentiality order in relation to the interlocutory process pending appellate review.
- Parties
- First Plaintiff: Onefone Australia Pty Limited; Second Plaintiff: DCA Resources Australia Pty Limited (ACN 086 919 351); Third Plaintiff: Pacific Finance Group Pty Limited (ACN 062 783 813); Fourth Plaintiff: Concept Systems (Australia) Pty Limited (ACN 010 602 892); First Defendant: One.Tel Limited (in liquidation) (ACN 068 193 153); Second Defendant: Steven Sherman; Third Defendant: Peter Walker; Applicant: John Deloughery; Applicant: Barbara Galloon; Applicant: Gary Phillips; Applicant: SingTel Optus Limited; Respondent: Special Purpose Liquidator
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 May 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Corporations—equity Proceedings / Interlocutory Orders Regarding Removal to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Interlocutory applications removed to Court of Appeal; confidentiality order discharged; directions made for filing affidavits; costs reserved to applicants' process.
- Legal Topics
- Appointment of Liquidator, Confidentiality Orders, Standing, Procedural Fairness, Removal of Proceedings, Right to Be Heard
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Onefone Australia Pty Limited
First Plaintiff
DCA Resources Australia Pty Limited (ACN 086 919 351)
Second Plaintiff
Pacific Finance Group Pty Limited (ACN 062 783 813)
Third Plaintiff
Concept Systems (Australia) Pty Limited (ACN 010 602 892)
Fourth Plaintiff
One.Tel Limited (in liquidation) (ACN 068 193 153)
First Defendant
Steven Sherman
Second Defendant
Peter Walker
Third Defendant
John Deloughery
Applicant
Barbara Galloon
Applicant
Gary Phillips
Applicant
SingTel Optus Limited
Applicant
Special Purpose Liquidator
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Corporations—equity Proceedings / Interlocutory Orders Regarding Removal to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether committee of inspection/creditors are entitled to be heard on applications by special purpose liquidator
- 2 Whether confidential orders made by Barrett J should be discharged
- 3 Appropriateness of removing interlocutory applications to the Court of Appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The Court determined that the interlocutory processes filed by the special purpose liquidator and the applicants raised substantial appellate questions about the validity and procedural fairness of Barrett J's orders, justifying removal of those interlocutory proceedings to the Court of Appeal under r 1.21, and discharged the confidentiality order in relation to the interlocutory process pending appellate review.
Court Disposition
Interlocutory applications removed to Court of Appeal; confidentiality order discharged; directions made for filing affidavits; costs reserved to applicants' process.
Orders
- If and insofar as there was an order that the interlocutory process filed by the special purpose liquidator on 14 May 2010 be kept confidential, that order is discharged.
- Special purpose liquidator's interlocutory process filed 14 May 2010 and applicants' interlocutory process filed 26 May 2010 are removed into the Court of Appeal.
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