Update on McCabes' article " 'Are we there yet' - When are proceedings over for the purposes of enforcement"
The High Court of Australia has refused an application for special leave to appeal the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in Sarks v Cassegrain [2015] FCAFC 38, confirming that a judgment issued by the Court on the basis of filing of a certificate of costs assessment is a "final judgment" for the purposes of s 40(1)(g) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) and can therefore ground a bankruptcy notice.
It is not uncommon for companies served with wind up proceedings to appoint external administrators for the purposes of investigating the affairs of the company and so that recommendations can be made to creditors to either have the company wound up, execute a deed of company arrangement or hand the company back into the control of directors.
In circumstances where the administrators conclude that the company should be wound up, it is common for the administrators to seek to be appointed as the official liquidators of the company.
In so far as they relates to creditor's statutory demands, the provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) are construed by the courts particularly prescriptively.
On 5 June 2015, His Honour Justice Brereton delivered judgment in In the matter of Unity Resources Group Australia Pty Limited [2015] NSWSC 1174. This is another example of the technical application of these sections by the court.
The Fair Entitlements Guarantee Act 2012 (Cth) requires the Commonwealth Government to pay outstanding superannuation, annual leave, redundancy and wages entitlements for eligible employees who have lost their jobs due to the liquidation or bankruptcy of their employers. It is generally recognised as an important safety net for employees, so that their superannuation is guaranteed.
The Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (the Act) provides a regime by which a debtor can compromise with his/her creditors outside formal bankruptcy. The provisions are found in Part X (Personal Insolvency Agreements) and Part IX (Debt Agreements) of the Act.
DEBT AGREEMENTS
ECJ, Sixth Chamber, Judgment of 28 January 2015.
The judgment resolves the prejudicial question submitted by a Mercantile Court concerning the maintenance of workers’ rights in the event of the transfer of companies or part of them, and branches of business.
One of the blocks of Royal Decree-Law 1/2015, dated 27 February (hereinafter, the “RDL”) envisages the implementation of urgent measures to reduce the financial burden, introducing amendments mainly in the Insolvency Act, in Royal Decree-Law 6/2012, dated 9 March, concerning urgent measures to protect mortgage debtors without resources, and in Law 1/2013, dated 14 May, concerning measures to strengthen the protection of mortgage debtors, the restructuring of debt and low-income lease.
The High Court has recently clarified what is required for the creation of an express trust (Korda & Ors v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd [2015] HCA 6 (Korda)).
To be effective, express trusts must satisfy the three certainties of intention, subject matter and object. That is:
CLARITY OF INTENTION KEY TO CREATION OF EXPRESS TRUSTS: A WIN FOR RECEIVERS
The High Court has recently clarified what is required for the creation of an express trust (Korda & Ors v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd [2015] HCA 6 (Korda)).
To be effective, express trusts must satisfy the three certainties of intention, subject matter and object. That is:
The Royal Decree-Law 1/2015 dated February 27, 2015 (the “RDL”) seeks to implement urgent measures to, among other things, reduce individual debtors’ financial burden.