Category Archives: Corporations Law

Re Wakim [1999] HCA 27 | 17 June 1999

ON 17 JUNE 1999, the High Court of Australia delivered Re Wakim [1999] HCA 27; 198 CLR 511; 163 ALR 270; 73 ALJR 839 (17 June 1999).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1999/27.html

The High Court held that the provisions of the Corporations Law and cross-vesting legislation that purport to confer State jurisdiction on Federal Courts are constitutionally invalid, although State courts may continue to exercise Federal jurisdiction or each other’s jurisdiction.

The decision led to enactment of the Commonwealth Corporations Act 2001, a Federally administered company law which could also be exercised in State Courts.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar & Ors [2012] HCA 17

ON THIS DAY in 2012, the High Court of Australia delivered Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar & Ors [2012] HCA 17 (3 May 2012).

The non-executive directors of James Hardie Industries Limited named in these proceedings were held to have breached their duties as directors by approving the release of a misleading announcement to the Australian Stock Exchange regarding the funds to be made available for the payment of asbestos related injury and death claims following a restructure sending the company offshore.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2012/17.html

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 401

Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 401 (16 December 2011)

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Fitness First (Australia) Pty Ltd v Dubow [2011] NSWSC 605

Fitness First (Australia) Pty Ltd v Dubow [2011] NSWSC 605 (21 June 2011).

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd v Dubow [2011] NSWSC 531

Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd v Dubow [2011] NSWSC 531 (3 June 2011)

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

Free & Ors [2010] NSWSC 1079

Free & Ors [2010] NSWSC 1079 (17 September 2010).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2010/1079.html

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

The Bell Group Ltd (in liq) v Westpac Banking Corporation (No 9)

ON 28 OCTOBER 2008, Justice Owen of the Supreme Court of WA delivered The Bell Group Ltd (in liq) v Westpac Banking Corporation (No 9) [2008] WASC 239 (28 October 2008).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/wa/WASC/2008/239.html

One of Australia’s longest cases.

Legal Helpdesk

1300 00 2088

Sons of Gwalia Ltd v Margaretic [2007] HCA 1

ON 31 JANUARY 2007, the High Court of Australia delivered Sons of Gwalia Ltd v Margaretic [2007] HCA 1; (2007) 232 ALR 232; (2007) 81 ALJR 525 (31 January 2007).

Section 563A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) provided:

“Payment of a debt owed by a company to a person in the person’s capacity as a member of the company, whether by way of dividends, profits or otherwise, is to be postponed until all debts owed to, or claims made by, persons otherwise than as members of the company have been satisfied.”

The High Court held that s563A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) did not apply to shareholders making a claim for damages for losses suffered as a result of the company’s wrongdoing when acquiring the shares as such claims are not owed to the shareholder in their capacity as a member of the company. Accordingly, a claim by Mr Margaretic for losses arising from being misled in the acquisition of his shares before the company went into administration were to be treated as debts under s553 of the Act and ranked equally with the claims of other creditors.

Parliament has since amended the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) by the passage of the Corporations (Sons of Gwalia) Act 2010. In general terms, the effect of the amendment is that (1) share ownership does not preclude a claim against the insolvent company but payment shareholder claims relating to share dealings is to be postponed until the payment of all other debts and (2) a person whose claim has been postponed is entitled to receive documents relating to the insolvency and in some cases, with the permission of the court, vote at meetings regarding the conduct of the administration.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2007/1.html

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

2001 | United States v Microsoft Corporation

United States v Microsoft Corporation 253 F 3d 34  (2001).

Lawyer
Peter O’Grady
BA, LLB, Grad Cert Leg Prac, Acc Spec Lawyer

Re Wakim [1999] HCA 27

ON 17 JUNE 1999, the High Court of Australia delivered Re Wakim [1999] HCA 27; 198 CLR 511; 163 ALR 270; 73 ALJR 839 (17 June 1999).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1999/27.html

The High Court held that the provisions of the Corporations Law and cross-vesting legislation that purport to confer State jurisdiction on Federal Courts are constitutionally invalid, although State courts may continue to exercise Federal jurisdiction or each other’s jurisdiction.

The decision led to enactment of the Commonwealth Corporations Act 2001, a Federally administered company law which could also be exercised in State Courts.

Lawyers 1300 00 2088