The Australian government introduced two significant new insolvency solutions following the enactment of the Corporations Amendment (Corporate Insolvency Reforms) Act 2020 (Cth), as part of the federal government’s JobMaker Plan in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The second of these solutions is the Small Business Debt Restructure Process (SBDRP).

The benefits of entering a SBDRP include:

If a debtor company receives a statutory demand, it has 21 days to file an application (along with a supporting affidavit) with the Court to set aside that statutory demand. The Court may set aside this statutory demand if:

Practitioners will be pleased to know that the NSW Supreme Court has provided clarity on the order of priority for employee debts and secured creditor claims.

The matter, In the matter of Spitfire Corporation Limited (in liquidation) and Aspirio Pty Ltd (in liquidation), involved the liquidators of two insolvent companies (Spitfire Corporation Ltd and Aspirio Pty Ltd) seeking directions under s 90-15 of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations).

Summary

On 16 December 2021, judgment was handed down in Federal Court of Australia proceedings QUD 31 of 2021, which found that set off provisions under the Corporations Act2001 (Cth) (Act) cannot be relied on to reduce an unfair preference claim under section 588FA of the Act.

The judgment will likely see practical consequences in the increased capacity of liquidators to acquire voidable transactions under the statutory priority regime.

Part 1: A Broad Overview of Bankruptcy

‘As privileged professionals, who live by the words of the English language, lawyers have a special duty to be clear in what they say and write’

When discussing any area of law, precision is essential.

A common source of confusion amongst both lawyers and the public generally is the difference between insolvency and bankruptcy. Though you may see the terms being used interchangeably (especially in legal dramas), the two concepts are distinct.

A Practical Guide to Bankruptcy:

Part 1: A Broad Overview of Bankruptcy

‘As privileged professionals, who live by the words of the English language, lawyers have a special duty to be clear in what they say and write’[1]

When discussing any area of law, precision is essential.

It goes without saying that the law is a complex language. Indeed, it is so complex, and at times, so incoherent, that the Merriam Webster Dictionary has a specific term for it: ‘legalese’. As the law of insolvency is no exception, this article has compiled some of the most frequently used (and ambiguous) insolvency terms.

Bankruptcy notice

Amirbeaggi as trustee of the bankrupt estate of Hanna v Hanna [2021] FCA 988

Background:

This past week the Federal Court handed down an interesting bankruptcy decision concerning the late lodgement of cross-claims. The respondent in this matter on two separate occasions failed to serve a cross-claim within the allotted time. This was despite being granted an extension. The question for the court was whether should be granted to permit the applicant to serve the cross-claim notwithstanding these delays.

A recent NSWSC decision, In the matter of Sails Corp Pty Ltd [2021], confirmed the problematic task of rebutting a presumption of insolvency. In this matter, the defendant’s presumed insolvency arose from an unsatisfied Creditor’s Statutory Demand. Therefore, the defendant bore the onus of rebutting this presumption and establishing solvency.

Establishing Solvency:

Establishing solvency requires more than a bald assertion.

When a company is in danger of becoming insolvent or has entered voluntary administration, a Deed of Company Arrangement (DOCA) may be put into place. A DOCA is a binding agreement between a company and its creditors setting out how the affairs and assets of the company will be dealt with.

However, if the DOCA is subsequently terminated or the company enters liquidation, can a payment made during the course of a DOCA be recovered as an unfair preference?