This week’s TGIF considers a decision of Georges (Liquidator), in the Matter of SIRA Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) [2022] FCA 768, in which liquidators were granted leave to serve a summons for examination on a company based in Singapore.
Key takeaways
In the recent case of Stubbings v Jams 2 Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 6, the High Court has allowed an appeal relating to asset-based lending (ABL) and the enforceability of security associated with these loans. The High Court held that whilst asset-based lending itself is not unconscionable, certain conduct may render loans and security unenforceable. The decision is a reminder that lenders should ensure the circumstances of potential borrowers are fully scrutinised prior to lending.
This week’s TGIF considers a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales on whether leave should be granted for proceedings against a court-appointed liquidator personally.
Key Takeaways
This week’s TGIF looks at a recent decision of the Victorian Supreme Court, where a winding up application was adjourned to allow the debtor company to pursue restructuring under the recently introduced small business restructuring reforms.
Key takeaways
This week’s TGIF looks at a recent case where the Federal Court ordered the reinstatement of two companies to allow proceedings to be commenced against the liquidator of those companies for alleged breaches of duty (Lee v Parker [2020] FCA 1453).
Key takeaways
This week’s TGIF considers the decision in McCallum, in the Matter of Re Holdco Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed)[2020] FCA 666, where the Court granted leave for administrators to sell assets in which third parties claimed ownership or security interests, after determining that those interests were adequately protected.
Key takeaways
This week’s TGIF examines In the matter of Bytecan Pty Limited (in liquidation) [2019] NSWSC 1910, in which the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered the scope of the advantage to an indemnifying creditor available under section 564.
The facts
This week’s TGIF examines a recent decision of the NSW Supreme Court which considered whether funds held in certain bank accounts of a failed Ponzi scheme should be returned to investors or paid to creditors of the companies.
What happened?
Since freezing orders were obtained by ASIC in 2017, details surrounding the infamous Courtenay House ‘Ponzi’ scheme operated from a small office at Westfield in Bondi have slowly emerged.
This week’s TGIF considers the decision in Erskine as liquidator of North Shore Property Developments Pty Ltd (in liq) v 72-74 Gordon Crescent Lane Cove Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 62, where a determination was upheld that Courts should not go behind a deed of release entered into by a liquidator without a valid basis for doing so.
This week’s TGIF considers the decision in Mujkic Family Company Pty Ltd v Clarke & Gee Pty Ltd [2018] TASFC 4, which concerns a rather novel issue – whether a solicitor acting for a shareholder might also owe a duty of care to the company in liquidation.
What happened?
In 2015, the Supreme Court of Queensland ordered that the corporate trustee of a family trust be wound up.