VadeLab
AllowedSupreme Court of New South Wales·

Liquidators Can Distribute Trust Funds After Costs

Case No.

Topics

liquidationtrust fundscosts and expenses

Provisions

Corporations Act 2001, s 473(10)Corporations Act 2001, s 499Corporations Act 2001, s 504(2)Corporations Act 2001, s 511Trustee Act 1925, s 63

📚 Full judgment

The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.

📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The liquidators were justified in distributing trust funds among beneficiaries who have a proprietary claim.
  • The liquidators' expenses of $51,593 were allowed as they were reasonably incurred.
  • The costs of these proceedings, capped at $26,702.18, were allowed as they were reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount.
  • A disbursement of $11,000 for legal advice was allowed despite insufficient evidence because advice was reasonably required.
  • The liquidators' remuneration was set at $36,000, which is 20% of the assets realised, influenced by the time consumed.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The liquidators' claim for $19,989.13 paid to solicitors was not justified due to lack of detail in invoices.
  • Assessing remuneration solely by applying standard hourly rates to time spent was rejected as it disregards other factors.
  • The claim for $7,097.50 for Adviser Notices was questioned because the notices did not identify the amount owing to each adviser.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about whether the liquidators could distribute the trust funds among the beneficiaries after paying their reasonable costs and expenses.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Corporations Act 2001, sections 473(10), 499, 504(2), and 511, and the Trustee Act 1925, section 63 were applied.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the person who brought the case, confirming their entitlement to distribute the trust funds.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, this means that liquidators can distribute trust funds among beneficiaries after paying their reasonable costs and expenses.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents that mattered included the liquidators' affidavits and the relevant legislation cited.

Official source: Supreme Court of New South Wales this page does not reproduce the decision; it links to the court's own publication. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Supreme Court of New South Wales and is reproduced from NSW Caselaw (© State of New South Wales) under its published republication policy. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.