To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
Please Note: A project is currently underway to digitise this judgment to enhance its onscreen presentation. For now, the original version of this judgment may be viewed onscreen and downloaded as a text-analysed and searchable PDF document.
Click here for more information.
Word Highlighter:
Original Version Loading (as on screen PDF)
Preparing document for printing…
Editorial Notes
Published Case Name:
Pauls Limited v Dwyer & Ors
Shortened Case Name:
Pauls Limited v Dwyer
MNC:
[2001] QSC 103
Court:
QSC
Judge(s):
Douglas J
Date:
11 Apr 2001
Litigation History
Event
Citation or File
Date
Notes
Primary Judgment
[2000] QSC 497
22 Dec 2000
Respondent applied for declarations that Part 6A 2 of the Corporations Law was constitutionally invalid on the basis it did not provide for acquisition of shares 'on just terms'; application unsuccessful and Part 6A 2 of the Corporations Law declared valid in so far as it pertained to the application: Douglas J
Primary Judgment
[2001] QSC 67 (2001) 19 ACLC 959
13 Mar 2001
Applicant applied under s 664 of the Corporations Law Act 1989 for approval to acquire 24,263 non-redeemable preference shares at a price of $2.57; whether compulsory acquisition notice offered fair value for remaining securities; declared that $2.57 per share represented fair value: Douglas J
Primary Judgment
[2001] QSC 103
11 Apr 2001
On the question of costs, applicant ordered to pay portion of Ms Elkington's costs and otherwise ordered that there be no order as to costs: Douglas J
Respondents appealed against [2001] QSC 67; whether $2.57 per share constituted "fair value" within meaning of s 667C(1) of the Corporations Act; whether Chapter 6A of Corporations Act contrary to acquisition on just terms and therefore constitutionally invalid; appeals dismissed: Davies and Jerrard JJA and Jones J
Special Leave Refused (HCA)
[2004] HCATrans 230
23 Jun 2004
Respondents applied for special leave to appeal against [2002] QCA 545; whether sufficient prospects of success; applications dismissed: Gleeson CJ and Callinan J
