Manny v Cth; Manny v University of Canberra

[2023] ACTSC 160

Supreme Court of the ACT29 June 2023

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Parties
3. › Joinder of parties
4. › Whether deregistered companies and business names have legal personality to be joined as parties
5. › Whether companies in liquidation may be joined where derivative proceedings test not satisfied
6. › Whether joinder of registered company necessary to enable effective adjudication
7. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 236, 237, 447A, 601AD
8. › Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 210, 211, 220
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Pleadings
3. › Strike out application
4. › Whether statement of claim discloses reasonable cause of action
5. › Whether pleading fails to comply with procedural rules
6. › Whether leave to replead should be granted
7. › Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 405, 406, 407A, 425, 432
1. Corporations
2. › Derivative proceedings
3. › Leave to bring proceedings on behalf of company in liquidation
4. › Whether proposed proceedings have solid foundation
5. › Whether practical considerations support initiation
6. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 236, 237, 447A
1. Corporations
2. › Deregistration
3. › Effect of deregistration on legal personality
4. › Whether deregistered company capable of suing or being sued
5. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 601AD

Quick Take

Deregistered companies and registered business names cannot be joined as parties to proceedings as they lack legal personality. Leave to bring derivative proceedings on behalf of companies in liquidation requires a solid foundation showing reasonable prospects of success and tangible benefit, and practical considerations including the availability of indemnity or security. A pleading that fails to comply with procedural rules may be struck out, but leave to replead should be granted where the underlying causes of action are not clearly untenable.