Hammill v Steele [1932] HCA 50

Hammill v Steele [1932] HCA 50

Clause 8 of the deed of arrangement expressly empowers the trustees, at their discretion, to suspend or dismiss any person employed in any of the specified capacities, including the manager (debtor). Therefore, the trustees had the power to dismiss the debtor from the position of manager under the deed.

Parties
Appellant: Louisa Hammill; Respondent: Robert Moore Steele; Respondent: William Cormack Calder
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Court of Bankruptcy
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Deed of Arrangement, Manager Dismissal, Powers of Trustees
Bankruptcy Deed of Arrangement Manager Dismissal Powers of Trustees

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louisa Hammill

Appellant

Robert Moore Steele

Respondent

William Cormack Calder

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Court of Bankruptcy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustees had power under the deed of arrangement to dismiss the debtor from her position as manager of the business

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 8 of the deed of arrangement expressly empowers the trustees, at their discretion, to suspend or dismiss any person employed in any of the specified capacities, including the manager (debtor). Therefore, the trustees had the power to dismiss the debtor from the position of manager under the deed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed accordingly.