This week’s TGIF considers the case of Brandon Industries (Vic) Pty Ltd v Locker Pty Ltd [2016] VSC 373 where the Court dismissed an application to set aside a statutory demand due to the applicant’s failure to establish a genuine dispute or offsetting claim pursuant to section 459H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
BACKGROUND
The Australian government is working to significantly reform Australia’s current insolvency laws by mid-2017.
The reforms are intended to achieve greater likelihood of business preservation by introducing the flexibility to achieve real turnaround of businesses in crisis.
The proposed changes include:
Any legislation or action which seeks to alter the pari passu distribution of an insolvent company's property amongst its creditors needs to be very carefully and comprehensively considered, and have regard to accrued rights and interests.
This week’s TGIF considers Britax Childcare Pty Ltd, in the matter of Infa Products Pty Ltd v Infa Products Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2016] FCA 848 which considers setting aside a DOCA and the administrator’s casting vote.
FACTS OF THIS CASE
After complex litigation with Britax, Infa Products lost the case and as a direct consequence, appointed administrators.
What’s insolvency got to do with it….
Times are tough in the Queensland construction industry.
In recent times we have seen the demise of names such as Glezeil, Carmichael Builders, SX Projects, TRAC Construction, Gary Deane Constructions and JM Kelly (Project Builders) Pty Ltd.
Insolvency affects all industries, but, given the hierarchical nature of construction contracts, when a construction company is unable to pay its bills, it can cause devastating results both up and down the contractual line:
Liquidators of insolvent Australian companies often pursue directors of the failed company in recovery proceedings for the benefit of creditors. Following a High Court of Australia decision in April 2016, it is now clear that the liquidators can join liability insurers of defendant directors in such proceedings, even when the insurer has denied liability under a policy. The liquidators, even though not a party to the contract, may then seek a declaration in the same proceedings that the insurer is liable to indemnify the insured defendant.
In brief
On 1 June 2016, the Victorian Court of Appeal determined that a group member in a class action is not precluded by Anshun estoppel from raising separate defences in claims against them.
Short history of the Timbercorp proceedings
The Timbercorp group of companies operated managed investment schemes. The group went into liquidation in June 2009, at which time there were more than 14,500 outstanding loans to over 7,500 borrowers, totalling more than $450m.
This week’s TGIF considers the most recent decision in a line of cases which hold that the provisions of the Code of Banking Practice may be incorporated into loan agreements, as well as guarantees given by individuals.
BACKGROUND
FUNDING IN FOCUS CONTENT SERIES REPORT T HREE JULY 2016 2 | VANNIN CAPITAL Funding in Focus Content Series Welcome Welcome to the third edition of Funding in Focus. Since the inception of Funding in Focus, the funding market has grown and developed. This development is reflected in the number, type and complexity of the cases we are being asked to fund across the globe. We have seen an exponential rise in requests for funding in a range of sectors, including in arbitration and insolvency, and in a range of jurisdictions.
In Berryman v Zurich Australia Ltd [2016] WASC 196 it was decided that a bankrupt's entitlement to claim a TPD benefit under a life insurance policy is not an entitlement that is divisible amongst the bankrupt's creditors, and therefore such an entitlement does not vest in the Official Trustee in bankruptcy. Tottle J of the Supreme Court of Western Australia ruled that the bankrupt insured could continue an action in his own name to recover the TPD benefit. Life insurers may need to adjust their claims' payment practices in light of the Berryman decision.