Ausino International Pty Ltd v Apex Sports Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 182

Ausino International Pty Ltd v Apex Sports Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 182

Court's jurisdiction to make interim orders under s.467(1)(c) of the Corporations Act is only available 'on hearing a winding up application', and pursuant to s.444E, the application to wind up cannot be proceeded with while the deed of company arrangement is in force; thus, the Court cannot grant the interlocutory relief sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Corporations Winding Up Application / Interlocutory Application, Pre Hearing of Winding Up
Outcome
Application for interlocutory relief dismissed.
Legal Topics
['winding Up in Insolvency' 'deed of Company Arrangement' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'asset Preservation Order' 'statutory Jurisdiction Under Corporations Act']

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

Corporations Winding Up Application / Interlocutory Application, Pre Hearing of Winding Up

  1. 1 ["Whether the funds in Kemp Strang's trust account are an asset of Apex Sports Pty Ltd" 'Whether the Court can make an interlocutory asset preservation order in winding up proceedings before the hearing of the application, given statutory restrictions imposed by a deed of company arrangement and ss.444E, 467(1)(c), and 447A of the Corporations Act']

Ratio Decidendi

Court's jurisdiction to make interim orders under s.467(1)(c) of the Corporations Act is only available 'on hearing a winding up application', and pursuant to s.444E, the application to wind up cannot be proceeded with while the deed of company arrangement is in force; thus, the Court cannot grant the interlocutory relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory relief dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Interlocutory order refused.']