Final determination in the High Court stands
2008 case note – leave to appeal, statutory demand set aside, liquidation, standing, party to the proceeding, applications for relief and recall.
Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005, Companies Act 1993
Central Equipment Company Limited made two applications for special leave in the Court of Appeal for interim relief in relation to two prior decisions of the High Court which put the company into liquidation. These two prior decisions were cause for Mr Faloon to make applications for relief and recall. The High Court found that these proceedings had already been concluded by final judgments and were final. The Court could not exercise its jurisdiction in respect of Mr Faloon's two applications.
This was a Directions Hearing. The purpose of this hearing was for the Court to determine what to do with the two applications made by Mr Faloon in relation to previous decisions of the Court. However, the judge proceeded to deal with the matters substantively.
The hearing was in respect of long-running claims by Mr Faloon concerning certain rights which he asserts arise from his association with Central Equipment Limited. In particular Mr Faloon's applications were:
- for special leave in the Court of Appeal to bring a civil appeal, in particular, an application for the grant of interim relief under r 12(3)(b) of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 in relation to a decision of the Court dated 20 October 2006 which put the defendant company (Central Equipment Company Limited) into liquidation
- for directions under r 425 or r 700ZI (2) of the High Court Rules for allegations of fraud, negligence and misfeasance, or like behaviour against the Commissioner
- to be made a party to an application dated 28 March 2007, and
- for recall of an order dated October 2006 under section 174 of the Companies Act 1993 (Court documents 57), before a formal record of it had been drawn up and sealed.
On 2 October 2006, Judge Faire had ordered that Central Equipment Company Limited be put into liquidation (proceeding CIV 2003-470-923). Mr Faloon applied for leave to appeal this decision in the Court of Appeal. Leave to appeal that decision was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 3 March 2008.
On 10 May 2006, Judge Faire had also refused Mr Faloon's application to have the Commissioner's statutory demand set aside (proceeding CIV 2003-470-856).
The decisions made in these two proceedings were cause for Mr Faloon to make applications for relief and recall. Judge Faire stated that these proceedings had already been concluded by final judgments, and due to the finality of these judgments Judge Faire could exercise no remaining jurisdiction in respect of Mr Faloon's two applications.
The applications were struck out. As this was essentially a directions hearing (with a swifter than anticipated outcome) costs were not awarded.