Event and Time
Event Description
- Case Title: Langdon v Tradelink [2024]
- Date of Events:
- Company administration commences: 29 January 2024 - Caveat lodged by Tradelink: 29 January 2024 - Meeting of creditors held: 4 March 2024 - Plaintiff seeks removal of caveat: March 2024
Application and Claims
- The plaintiff (Shane Langdon’s spouse) sought orders under s 90(3) of the Transfer of Land Act 1958 for the removal of a caveat lodged by Tradelink over their property during the administration of Langdon Building Pty Ltd.
- Tradelink claimed an interest in the property based on a 'Guarantee and Indemnity and Charge' signed by the plaintiff, through which she agreed to secure Tradelink's interests with a charge over the property.
Judicial Decisions
- The court had to determine two primary issues:
1. Whether Tradelink lodged the caveat contrary to the prohibition in s 440J(1) of the Corporations Act. 2. Whether the balance of convenience favored maintaining the caveat lodged by Tradelink.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
Plaintiff (Shane Langdon’s spouse) Arguments:
- The caveat impacts her ability to secure funding for the DOCA proposed by her husband’s company.
- Claimed there was a prima facie case for removal as the caveat was lodged in breach of s 440J(1) of the Corporations Act.
Defendant (Tradelink) Arguments:
- The caveat was validly lodged under their rights from the Guarantee, and thus was not in breach of s 440J(1).
- The caveat’s maintenance is critical to preserve their priority as a secured creditor.