Wilson v Manna Hill Mining Company Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 371

Wilson v Manna Hill Mining Company Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 371

Opposition to application for extension of time was entirely without merit; thus applicants are entitled to costs against the second respondent for the extended hearing time occasioned by his opposition.

Parties
First Applicant: Wayne Stephen Wilson; Second Applicant: Gayle Lawton; First Respondent: Manna Hill Mining Company Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: David Gerald Moore; Third Respondent: Graham Desmond Hagger; Fourth Respondent: East Adelaide Company Pty Ltd; Fifth Respondent: Dene Robert Spratt; Sixth Respondent: Stephen John Ewen; Seventh Respondent: Hodgemore Pty Ltd; Eighth Respondent: Manna Hill Gold Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs in Proceeding Under Corporations Act / Post Hearing (costs Order After Application to Extend Time)
Outcome
Costs order granted in part
Legal Topics
Meeting of Creditors, Administrator Appointment, Costs Orders
Corporations Law Meeting of Creditors Administrator Appointment Costs Orders

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wayne Stephen Wilson

First Applicant

Gayle Lawton

Second Applicant

Manna Hill Mining Company Pty Ltd

First Respondent

David Gerald Moore

Second Respondent

Graham Desmond Hagger

Third Respondent

East Adelaide Company Pty Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Dene Robert Spratt

Fifth Respondent

Stephen John Ewen

Sixth Respondent

Hodgemore Pty Ltd

Seventh Respondent

Manna Hill Gold Pty Ltd

Eighth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Costs in Proceeding Under Corporations Act / Post Hearing (costs Order After Application to Extend Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to costs against the second respondent for opposition to application to extend time to convene a meeting of creditors

Ratio Decidendi

Opposition to application for extension of time was entirely without merit; thus applicants are entitled to costs against the second respondent for the extended hearing time occasioned by his opposition.

Court Disposition

Costs order granted in part

Orders

  • Second respondent to pay applicants' costs occasioned by his opposition to applicants' application.
  • Costs fixed at $600.