FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Crisp, in the matter of Buchanan Group Holdings Pty Ltd v Iliopoulos [2012] FCA 392
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
DATE OF ORDER: | |
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Such requirements for service as may otherwise arise in relation to service of the Plaintiff’s application under section 530C(4) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) are otherwise dispensed with.
2. Pursuant to section 530C(4) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the Plaintiff be authorised to dispose of such of the property as was seized from Musks Road under warrant issued pursuant to the order of 13 December 2011 as is set out in Annexure A to this Order.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
GENERAL DIVISION | VID 1441 of 2011 |
BETWEEN: | GLENN ANTHONY CRISP (AS LIQUIDATOR OF COMPANIES) (ACCORDING TO THE ATTACHED SCHEDULE) Applicant
|
AND: | STEVEN ILIOPOULOS First Respondent PETER ILIOPOULOS Second Respondent JIMMY ILIOPOULOS Third Respondent DARRYL MACDONALD-JOHNSON Fourth Respondent KYLEY PADGETT Fifth Respondent VTL TRANSPORT & LOGISTICS PTY LTD Sixth Respondent PRECEDENT INVESTMENTS PTY LTD Seventh Respondent KEVIN ALEXANDER WATSON Eighth Respondent JANICE LILLIAN CRIPPS Ninth Respondent BRUCE TOWNSEND Tenth Respondent TRASH MEDIA PTY LTD Eleventh Respondent AHMAD HADDARA Twelfth Respondent SSL HOLDINGS PTY LTD Thirteenth Respondent VASILIS BARIAMIS Fourteenth Respondent ARNOLD PRADES Fifteenth Respondent
|
JUDGE: | NORTH J |
DATE: | 29 FEBRUARY 2012 |
PLACE: | MELBOURNE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 A warrant under s 530C(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) was issued in this proceeding. The warrant was executed on 19 December 2011. On 27 January 2012, the applicant liquidator applied for leave to dispose of the assets seized under the warrant, pursuant to s 530C(4). On 31 January 2012 and 1 February 2012, that application was heard by Jessup J.
2 The assets were seized from Musks Road and comprised 15 items being trailers, trucks with trailers, and a utility. The application was served on the first, second, and third respondents and the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent is related to the fourth respondent. The sixth and seventh respondents were not served. The applicant took the view that neither of these respondents could have any claim to the assets because they were simply land-holders on whose property the vehicles were situated.
3 At the hearing before Jessup J, there was evidence that one Bruce Townsend had made a claim to a tautliner trailer. Ms Gobbo, who appeared for the applicant today, explained that Mr Townsend had not appeared at that hearing, however, Jessup J had been concerned that one of the items seized might have included the trailer to which Mr Townsend had made a claim. She also told the Court that, save for Mr Townsend’s claim, his Honour was satisfied that the other assets seized at Musks Road were appropriate to be disposed of in accordance with the orders sought. However, his Honour adjourned the consideration of the applicant’s application for leave to dispose of those assets in their entirety.
4 Since the hearing before his Honour, it has become clear from correspondence between Mr Townsend and the applicant’s lawyers, that the tautliner trailer was in fact seized on 12 December 2011, prior to the execution of the warrants on 19 December 2011. The items which were seized on 19 December 2011 are thus not assets to which Mr Townsend makes any claim.
5 In an affidavit sworn by Andrew William Beck, who is a partner in the accounting firm RSM Bird Cameron which is assisting the applicant in the liquidations, it is explained that the schedule of 14 assets which was before Jessup J failed to record a Maxi-CUBE Classic lead van which was also seized from Musks Road on 19 December 2011. Consequently, the applicant has established that he should be granted leave to dispose of the 14 assets recorded in the schedule before Jessup J, together with the additional Maxi-CUBE Classic lead van referred to in Mr Beck’s affidavit.
6 As it appears that all persons who might have an interest in the assets seized have been served with notice of the application, it is appropriate to dispense with service of the application on any other person. There will be an order pursuant to s 530C(4) of the Corporations Act 2011 (Cth) that the plaintiff be authorised to dispose of the property seized from Musks Road under a warrant issued pursuant to the order of 13 December 2011, as set out in Annexure A of this order, which includes the 14 Musks Road assets in the schedule before Jessup J together with the additional asset, the Maxi-CUBE Classic lead van referred to in Mr Beck’s affidavit.
I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice North. |
Associate:
SCHEDULE OF COMPANIES
BUCHANAN GROUP HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 127 933 813)
BUCHANAN PARK PTY LTD (ACN 102 956 178)
PFL TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS PTY LTD (ACN 137 883 419)
PREJJ INVESTMENTS PTY LTD (ACN 112 893 286)
SERE (NSW) CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 022 929)
SERE (QLD) CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 022 992)
SERE (VIC) CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 023 300)
SERE (WA) CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 023 355)
SERE ADMIN CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 144 297)
TRIDENT ASSET MANAGEMENT PTY LTD (ACN 131 954 679)
VFS CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 047 622)
VFS TRANSPORT PTY LTD (ACN 080 073 570)
VIKING ASSET MANAGEMENT PTY LTD (ACN 112 893 884)
VIKING EXPRESS PTY LTD (ACN 130 189 463)
VIKING FLEET SERVICE PTY LTD (ACN 125 648 035)
VIKING PROPERTY HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 135 460 490)
VIKING REFRIGERATED TRANSPORT PTY LTD (ACN 143 356 969)
VIKING TOWING AND SALVAGE PTY LTD (ACN 088 683 425)
VIKING TRANSPORT EXPRESS PTY LTD (ACN 128 561 169)
VTE CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 047 711)
VTL CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 138 047 588)
VIKING GROUP HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 133 909 145)
UNIVERSAL CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 123 866 491)
