Biccom (No 12) Pty Ltd & Stevenson v Maldon Investments Pty Ltd & Anor [1999] QSC 266

5C?9/;;;'b6 -rl't, 3767 ( State Reporting Bureau TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made or sold without the written authority of the Director, State Reporting Bureau. SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CIVIL JURISDICTION MUIR J No 920 of 1999 BICCOM (NO 12) PTY LTD (ACN 062 660 735) and KERRIE ANN STEVENSON and MALDON INVESTMENTS PTY LTD (ACN 066 005 132) and PHILIP SULLIVAN BRISBANE .. DATE 22/07/99 JUDGMENT 1 REVISED COPIES ISSueD State Reporting Bureau Date ~I First Plaintiff Second Plaintiff First Defendant Second Defendant II Flllllr, Tllc Law COllrt.~, Gl'''''''C Slrcd, Brisballe, Q. 4000 l' I I (117) " '7 41(i11 /' (117) , 7 '7 roc; 17 .... C cp 101Il': ,l~"t, ) 'ax: ,l~"t ~_ ,l~ -- 1 of 4 -- 220799 T12-13/AW20 M/T 468/99 (Muir J) HIS HONOUR: The applicants are companies in receivership which by the Receivers apply for orders that inter alia the Receivers be directed to cause the applicants to complete a contract, copies of which are exhibited in these proceedings. I will refer to it as the contract. They also seek a variation of an order of this Court made on 10 Mach 1999. The two companies were co-owners of a restaurant business, disputes arose between them and Receivers were appointed. r---. i \ ) I , J I The Receivers made attempts to sell the business. They had the right and obligation to do that under the terms of their appointment. Those attempts were unsuccessful. Under the contract the business will be sold to one of the companies, Maldon Investments Pty Ltd, on essentially the same terms and conditions as were contained in a contract entered between the Receivers and another prospective purchaser a little time ago. That contract fell through. Maldon is represented on the hearing of this application and naturally supports the order sought. The other company, I • I Biccom (12) Pty Ltd is also represented. Mr Forde, who appears for Biccom neither consents to nor opposes the orders sought. It seems that. Biccom wishes to preserve any rights it may have against Mr.ldon and possibly also against the Receivers. I am satisfied on the material before me that the orders sought ought be made. Before making the orders I should 2 JUDGMENT -- 2 of 4 -- 220799 T12-13/AW20 M/T 468/99 (Muir J) advert to another matter. It is that a further order is sought that an affidavit of Ian Richard Hall, described as ("2") sworn on 21 July 1999 and filed today by leave, be placed in a sealed envelope which may not be opened without further order. The basis for seeking that order is concern on the part of the Receivers that if for some reason the sale falls through material of a commercially sensitive nature going to market , \ value of the property not be revealed to other prospecti~e purchasers. Mr Hall has given an undertaking that he take reasonable steps to file the affidavit referred to in paragraph 3 of the proposed order in a timely way. In my view it is appropriate to make such an order and I propose to do so. HIS HONOUR: Well, I can see why it is done and I think the idea behind it is good but I think it is just likely to cause more trouble than it is worth and my inclination is unless this course is opposed is to leave out the alternative. I propose that it read this way: "That the affidavit of Ian Richard Hall ("2") sworn on 21 July 1999 and filed by leave today and all the exhibits to it be placed in an envelope to be sealed and marked "not to be opened except by order of th:;.s Court." 3 JUDGMENT -- 3 of 4 -- 220799 T12-13/AW20 M/T 468/99 (Muir J) HIS HONOUR: As I say I am sure it is a good idea but I am not sure what the Registry would do with that situation if it arose. So I think it is better just to leave it with the order. Does anybody oppose that? HIS HONOUR: Well, I will make those alterations and order in terms of the draft initialled by me. from the undertaking he has just given. 4 Mr Hall is .released JUDGMENT o o o o -- 4 of 4 --