This week’s TGIF considers Fordyce v Ryan & Anor; Fordyce v Quinn & Anor [2016] QSC 307, where the Court considered whether a beneficiary’s interest in a discretionary trust amounted to ‘property’ for the purposes of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth).
BACKGROUND
This week’s TGIF considers a decision of the Victorian Supreme Court which examined the merits of appointing special purpose liquidators in circumstances where a creditor was only willing to fund investigations if the appointment was made.
What happened?
In May and June 2016, two registered education and training organisations (together, the RTOs) were placed into liquidation.
Key Points
- Reaffirms the importance of considering whether an applicant’s position would be improved by the making a vesting order
- Useful guidance on the extent of the court’s powers when granting a vesting order.
The Facts
This week’s TGIF considers the application of the principle in Re Universal Distributing and whether liquidators may claim an equitable lien to recover their costs and expenses, even if no assets are realised and no fund exists.
Background
In the recent Court of Appeal decision of Primary Securities Ltd v Willmott Forests Limited, liquidators had been appointed to an insolvent company which was the responsible entity of a managed investment forestry scheme.
This week’s TGIF considers In the matter of ACN 151 726 224 Pty Ltd (in liq) [2016] NSWSC 1801, where the Court dismissed a creditor’s application to remove liquidators who had refused to conduct public examinations of a director.
What happened?
On 18 November 2015, the District Court of New South Wales entered judgment against Ridley Capital Holdings Pty Limited (the Company) in the amount of $660,862.62.
Summary
A bankrupt was found to be in contempt of court following years of failing to comply with the terms of multiple court orders compelling him to disclose information about his financial affairs with a view to entering into an IPOA.
The Facts
Summary
The case provides guidance for liquidators as to the appropriate exercise to conduct when deciding whether the threshold of 25% in value of creditor claims has been reached in support of a request for a creditors’ meeting under s 171.
Key point
- A liquidator is not required to apply a ‘strict proof’ test to a creditor’s claim at the requisition stage of a creditors meeting.
The facts
In November 2014, the company entered into a creditor’s voluntary liquidation.
This week’s TGIF considers a NSW Court of Appeal decision which confirms that liquidators who bring a claim for preference payments within the limitation period may amend that claim to capture additional transactions otherwise subject to a statutory bar.
Background
Sydney Recycling Park (SRP) provided “tipping services” to Cardinal Group (Cardinal), who were in the business of “waste management”. Cardinal ran into some financial difficulties and on 1 February 2012, it was placed into liquidation.
This week’s TGIF considers Tai-Soo Suk v Hanjin Shopping Co Ltd [2016] FCA 1404 in which the Court was required to determine the scope of a stay arising under the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross Border Insolvency.
BACKGROUND
A Korean shipping company was subject to ‘rehabilitation’ proceedings in Korea. Rehabilitation proceedings seek to ‘rehabilitate’ insolvent debtors by restructuring their debt pursuant to a rehabilitation plan approved by the creditors and the Rehabilitation Court.
With the aim of improving transparency around ownership and control of companies, all UK unquoted and limited liability partnerships are required to maintain new registers of People with Significant Control (PSC). The details should be recorded in the company’s own PSC register and are to be filed at Companies House.
Anyone who satisfies at least one of the following conditions: