VadeLab
AllowedSupreme Court of New South Wales·

Scheme of Arrangement Approved in NSW Supreme Court

Case No.

Topics

scheme of arrangementcorporate restructuring

Provisions

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Ch 6, Pt 5.1, ss 411, 411(1), 411(3), 411(4)(b), 411(6), 411(17), 412(1), 412(1)(a)Corporations Regulations 2001 (Cth) regs 5.1.01, 5.6.11-5.6.36A, Sch 8Insolvency Practice Rules (Corporations) 2016 (Cth)Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 1999 (NSW) rr 2.15, 3.2, 3.4

📖 What the law says

Corporations Act 2001 s.411

The Corporations Act 2001, Section 411 allows the Court to order meetings of creditors or members of a company when a compromise or arrangement is proposed. The Court can also approve an explanatory statement accompanying the meeting notices.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a legal practitioner.

📚 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 Court found that the scheme was fair and reasonable, as it received the support of the requisite majority by number and value of the relevant class.
  • The Court noted that no notice of appearance was received from any person seeking to object to the scheme at the second Court hearing, and no one appeared to oppose it.
  • The Court accepted the independent expert report identifying potential advantages of the Junior Scheme for the claimant.
  • The Court was satisfied that the statutory requirements were met, including the resolution to approve the scheme being passed by the necessary majorities.
  • The Court found that all conditions precedent to the scheme had been satisfied.

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 a scheme of arrangement proposed by the claimant should be approved by the Court.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 411 of the Corporations Act 2001 was applied, along with the relevant regulations and rules.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents that mattered included the restructuring support deed signed by the requisite majority of the relevant class.

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.