application for approval of court-appointed receivers’ remuneration
where claimed remuneration represents total amount left in fund
whether remuneration fair and reasonable
Quick Take
1Remuneration of court-appointed receivers under r 14.24 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) must be fair and reasonable. The assessment is broad, having regard to the work reasonably required, complexity, the value and nature of the assets and dealings with secured creditors, rather than a mechanical comparison with sale proceeds. Where a receivership is neither complex nor lengthy, the court may need to consider the receivers' day-to-day activities at least in a general way.
2Where receivers were appointed at ASIC's suit to wind up unlawful unregistered managed investment schemes, the fact that investors will receive no return is relevant but not determinative of whether remuneration is reasonable. Assertions of fee write-offs, or of not charging for the remuneration application, carry little weight where the claimed amount already exhausts all available funds.
3A court may discharge receivers in its inherent jurisdiction on an adequate explanation of why the receivership should end. A release from liability at general law, however, requires the receivers to draw all potential sources of liability to the court's attention. On the facts, release was refused where a proceeding asserting an equitable interest in the receivership property remained on foot on unknown terms, and there was no evidence that no other claims existed.
