JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association v Fletcher; Grant Samuel Corporate Finance Pty Limited v Fletcher

[2014] NSWCA 31

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Corporations
2. › Insolvency
3. › Voidable transactions
4. › Extension of time to bring application
5. › Whether s 588FF(3) comprehensively governs extensions of time
6. › Whether only one application may be made under s 588FF(3)(b)
7. › Whether variation of extension order is made 'on an application' under s 588FF(3)(b)
8. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 588FF(3)
1. Corporations
2. › Insolvency
3. › Voidable transactions
4. › Extension of time
5. › Whether procedural rule permitting variation of orders is picked up by Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 79
6. › Whether UCPR r 36.16(2)(b) inconsistent with s 588FF(3)(b)
7. › Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 79
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and orders
3. › Setting aside or varying orders
4. › Order made in absence of party
5. › Whether 'party' in UCPR r 36.16(2)(b) extends to persons affected by order who are not parties on the record
6. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 36.16(2)(b)

Quick Take

A variation of an order extending time under s 588FF(3)(b) of the Corporations Act, made pursuant to UCPR r 36.16(2)(b), is properly characterised as an order made 'on an application' under s 588FF(3)(b) where the original extension application was filed within the three-year period, and the procedural rule is picked up by s 79 of the Judiciary Act. The word 'party' in UCPR r 36.16(2)(b) extends to persons affected by an order who are not parties on the record. However, the question whether multiple fresh applications for extension may be made under s 588FF(3)(b) remains open.