On 9 April 2018 Linc Energy Ltd (in liquidation) was convicted of causing serious environmental harm at its pilot underground coal gasification facility near Chinchilla, Queensland.
Administrators were appointed to the company on 15 April 2016. On 23 May they were appointed liquidators after creditors resolved that the company be wound up.
This week’s TGIF considers the case ofIn the matter of Bean and Sprout Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 351, an application seeking a declaration as to the validity of the appointment of a voluntary administrator.
What happened?
On 7 December 2018, Mr Kong Yao Chin (Chin) was purportedly appointed as the voluntary administrator of Bean and Sprout Pty Ltd (Company) by a resolution of the Company.
What you need to know in light of Seymour Whyte Constructions Pty Ltd v Ostwald Bros Pty Ltd (in liq)
The NSW Supreme Court recently handed down its decision in the matter of Seymour Whyte Constructions Pty Ltd v Ostwald Bros Pty Ltd (in liq); Ostwald Bros Pty Ltd (in liq) v Seymour Whyte Constructions Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 412, in which K&L Gates represented Seymour Whyte. The decision sheds light on numerous issues, including:
Reforms to insolvency laws will prevent contracting parties relying on certain clauses in construction contracts effective from 1 July 2018.
The reforms introduce changes to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and are likely to impact significantly on construction contracts.
A recent Federal Court decision puts administrators on notice that they must carefully consider the consequences of dealing with other people’s assets.
The decision of Justice Perram in White, in the matter of Mossgreen Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2018] FCA 471, highlights the care that administrators must take when administering property outside the scope of their authority.
In Mossgreen, administrators were appointed to a company that conducted a business that ran an auction house and gallery.
The Court will closely examine the relevant transactions involving the accounts and form a view – which may be an impressionistic one – as to the likely extent of the interest of each client (or each client group) in those accounts.
The updates to the Guidance Note provide useful guidance on disclosure requirements in the context of the safe harbour reforms but ultimately, the status quo continues.
The ASX has updated its continuous disclosure guidance for entities in financial distress to address uncertainty following the recent introduction of the insolvent trading safe harbour provisions into the Corporations Act. While the ASX has provided useful guidance, unsurprisingly, the position has not changed and directors must continually assess compliance with continuous disclosure requirements.
The High Court will consider the validity of “holding” deed of company arrangements (commonly known as “holding DOCAs”) under the Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act (theAct).
When Michael Howard invested in the Great Southern 2006 Organic Olives Income Project, he was confident it would prove to be a fine investment. So confident, that he borrowed the total cost from Great Southern Finance (GSF).
Little did he expect that 12 years later he would be defending a loan recovery action by the Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Limited (Bendigo Bank) for a large debt in a project which never paid a return and was wound up early because it had run out of funds.
Court of Appeal Clarifies the Tension Between Disclaimed Property and State Based Laws
On 9 March 2018, the Queensland Court of Appeal overturned the controversial first instance decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Linc Energy Pty Ltd (In Liquidation).[1]
The Court of Appeal’s judgement is significant, as it clarifies the position regarding: