AustLII [Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback]

Federal Court of Australia

You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> Federal Court of Australia >> 2004 >> [2004] FCA 659

[Database Search] [Name Search] [Recent Decisions] [Noteup] [Download] [Help]

Carter, in the matter of Romeso Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed) [2004] FCA 659 (24 May 2004)

Last Updated: 25 May 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Carter, in the matter of Romeso Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed)

[2004] FCA 659































IN THE MATTER OF ROMESO PTY LTD (ACN 089 135 928) (ADMINISTRATOR APPOINTED); BRUCE JAMES CARTER

No S 104 of 2004





FINN J
ADELAIDE
24 MAY 2004

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
S 104 OF 2004

IN THE MATTER OF ROMESO PTY LTD (ACN 089 135 928) (ADMINISTRATOR APPOINTED)

BRUCE JAMES CARTER
PLAINTIFF
JUDGE:
FINN J
DATE OF ORDER:
24 MAY 2004
WHERE MADE:
ADELAIDE


THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The convening period prescribed by s 439A(5) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) be extended for a period of 21 days from 25 May 2004 to 15 June 2004 in respect of the second meeting of creditors of Romeso Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed).

2. Liberty to apply be granted.














Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
S 104 OF 2004

IN THE MATTER OF ROMESO PTY LTD (ACN 089 135 928) (ADMINISTRATOR APPOINTED)

BRUCE JAMES CARTER
PLAINTIFF

JUDGE:
FINN J
DATE:
24 MAY 2004
PLACE:
ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 The plaintiff, Bruce James Carter, was appointed administrator of Romeso Pty Ltd on 5 May 2004. Under s 439A(5) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) the administrator was obliged to convene a meeting of the company's creditors for the purposes of that section by 25 May 2004.

2 Mr Carter now applies under s 439A(6) for an extension of the 21 day convening period set by subs (5) until 15 June 2004. In his supporting affidavit he relies upon two grounds for this extension. The first ground relates to the claims by certain creditors that monies owed to them by the company are secured by way of subrogation. The administrator is in the process of seeking advice as to the validity of these claims. I note that these creditors constitute in value about half of the unsecured creditors of the company.

3 The second ground relates to the obtaining of a valuation of the company's land and of improvements on it. That valuation, from the correspondence, cannot be obtained until 28 May 2004. The administrator deposes that it is in the interests of the creditors that the convening period be extended for the period sought to enable him to receive and consider the valuation for the purposes of preparing the s 439A report to creditors. He indicates that various directors of the company have advised that any proposal for a deed of company arrangement would depend on the valuation being so prepared.

4 None of the company's creditors, all of whom have been advised of this application, have objected to the extension of the convening period. The administrator has outlined the financial circumstances of the company and expressed the opinion that the interests of the unsecured creditors of the company would not be prejudiced by the extension sought.

5 In the circumstances I order that:

(1) the convening period prescribed by s 439A(5) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) be extended for a period of 21 days from 25 May 2004 to 15 June 2004 in respect of the second meeting of creditors of Romeso Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed); and

(2) liberty to apply be granted.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Finn.



Associate:

Dated: 24 May 2004

Counsel for the Plaintiff:
R Mansueto


Solicitor for the Plaintiff:
Minter Ellison


Date of Hearing:
24 May 2004


Date of Judgment:
24 May 2004


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2004/659.html