Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order  ||  Supreme Court: Certiorari Can Quash a Tribunal Decision That is Grossly Perverse  ||  Supreme Court: Informant’s Consent is Not Required to Quash a Case Settled With the Victim  ||  Madras High Court: False Posts Against a Minister are Not an Offence Without Intent to Cause Alarm  ||  Delhi High Court: Police Cannot Pick and Choose Among Accused Persons for Arrest  ||  J&K High Court: Bar Associations are Not ‘State’ under Article 12 and are Outside Writ Jurisdiction  ||  Calcutta High Court: Third Parties Can Challenge Inaction Against Unauthorised Construction  ||  Madras High Court: Being an Advocate Does Not Mean a Person Cannot Commit an Offence  ||  Delhi High Court: Husband Cannot Reopen Settled Marital Disputes to Avoid Maintenance Liability  ||  Calcutta High Court: State Cannot Deny CRMI Seats to Foreign Medical Graduates Citing Stipend Costs    

Jakovich vs. 3 Mood design Pty Ltd. - (25 Aug 2022)

After passing of resolution for voluntary winding up, no action or other civil proceeding is to be proceeded with or commenced against the company except by leave of the Court

Commercial

Present is an application made pursuant to Section 500(2) of the Corporations Act, 2001. The Plaintiff seeks to be granted leave nunc pro tunc to proceed with an action in the State Administrative Tribunal referred under the Building Services (Complaint Resolution and Administration) Act, 2011 (WA) (the SAT proceedings).

Section 500(2) of the Corporations Act, 2001 provides that after the passing of the resolution for voluntary winding up, no action or other civil proceeding is to be proceeded with or commenced against the company except by leave of the Court and subject to such terms as the Court imposes. Leave to proceed against the defendant for the purposes of obtaining access to documents would not affect the administration of the winding up of the company or prejudice the other creditors.

Granting leave would enable Mr. Jakovich to apply to the Tribunal for orders concerning the conduct of the proceedings including the production of documents as it sees fit under Section 32 or Section 34 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act, 2004. Leave may not be strictly necessary to obtain production of documents under a subpoena. However, rather than invite further argument as to whether that is the case and the difficulties to which Mr. Jakovich deposes in obtaining documents from the liquidator, present Court is satisfied Mr. Jakovich requires this Court's assistance to facilitate the bringing of an action against the defendant to enable him to seek orders to compel the production of documents in the SAT proceedings.

Pursuant to Section 500(2) of the Corporations Act, 2001, the Plaintiff has leave to proceed nunc pro tunc against the Defendant, 3 Moon Design Pty Ltd (in liq) in the proceedings in the State Administrative Tribunal on condition that: (a) any costs order not be sought or made against the defendant; and (b) any other monetary order is not enforced against the Defendant.

Tags : VOLUNTARY WINDING UP   PROCEEDING   LEAVE OF COURT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved