40 It was common cause between the parties that these provisions enabled the Master, if he considered this to be appropriate, to order an inquiry into and a review of the respondents' fees, even after the company had been deregistered. It was also common cause, after some debate between the parties, that the Court has the power, under s 447E, to order an inquiry into and review of the disbursements incurred by the administrator and, under s 536, to make similar orders in respect of disbursements incurred by a liquidator, although counsel for the respondents contended that the Court's powers under s 449E(2) of the Corporations Law did not extend to ordering a review of the disbursements incurred by an administrator because the word "remuneration" does not, on the authority of Venetian Nominees Pty Ltd v Conlan (1998) 20 WAR 96 at 99E and 100C - D, include disbursements. I should add, in any event, that, by s 1321(c) and (d) respectively of the Corporations Law (now the Corporations Act), a person aggrieved (and I shall return, below, to the question whether the appellant is a "person aggrieved") by any act, omission or decision of an administrator of a company or a liquidator of a company may appeal to the Court in respect of the act, omission or decision and the Court may confirm, reverse or modify the act or decision, or remedy the omission, as the case may be, and make such orders and give such directions as it thinks fit.