In Reel Action Sports Fishing Pty Ltd v Marine Engineering Consultants Pty Ltd, [1] the Court offered a timely warning to liquidators of the dangers of adopting and acting on an incorrect understanding of the ownership of contested property. The Court ordered damages against the liquidator personally, despite his position as agent for the company in liquidation.

Background

In a recent case involving Savannah AG Research Pty Ltd (Savannah), the Federal Court of Australia considered an application for relief by Savannah’s majority shareholder under section 447A(1) or section 447C(2) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) which alleged that the directors did not hold a genuine opinion Savannah was insolvent or likely to become insolvent and were motivated by an improper purpose.

This week’s TGIF considers In the matter of BCA National Training Group Pty Ltd (in liq) [2023] NSWSC 366, in which the priority between a liquidator’s remuneration and expenses claims and the claims of preferred creditors was clarified.

Key takeaways

The Hong Kong High Court has found that cryptocurrencies are property in a landmark case, further boosting the city’s virtual asset industry and its ambition to become the Asian crypto hub.

In this week’s TGIF, we consider the recent case of Re 52 The Esplanade Pty Ltd (in liquidation) [2023] QSC 57 which provides guidance as to how the relation-back day for a company is to be determined in circumstances where there are multiple winding up applications.

Key takeaways

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 first of these solutions is the Simplified Liquidation Process (SLP) which allows eligible small companies to participate in a faster and more financially commercial liquidation process.

The benefits of the process, compared to traditional liquidation, include:

Statutory demands can be issued by a creditor to a debtor company to demand payment of a debt due and owing. Failure to respond to the demand may result in the debtor company facing a winding-up application based on the company’s presumed insolvency.

However, there are several avenues available to a debtor company to apply for a court order setting aside a demand. The most common grounds are found in section 459H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), where a company can claim:

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:

Liquidation is the process of winding up a company’s financial affairs. The assets of the company are collected and realised, the resulting funds are applied to discharging the company’s liabilities and debts, and any residual funds are redistributed to the company’s members. Liquidation is the only way to fully wind up the affairs of a company and end the existence of the company.

The chief purposes of liquidation are threefold:

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: