This week’s TGIF considers a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Forex Capital Trading Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Invesus Group Limited [2024] NSWSC 867). Justice Ball determined that admission of a proof of debt by a liquidator was not akin to a judgment or settlement, and that such an admission did not create a new liability of the company.
In a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (In the matter of Pacific Plumbing Group Pty Limited (in liquidation) [2024] NSWSC 525), Justice Black determined that a payment made by a third party was not an unfair preference because the payment did not diminish assets available to creditors.
Key Takeaways
近年来,由于经济形势下行叠加新冠疫情,众多企业陷入经营困难和债务危机,庭外债务重组因具有较高的灵活性、自主性,不受时间和程序上的限制,成为化解企业债务危机的重要方式,而敏感债权因其涉众性成为庭外债务重组程序中的棘手问题。敏感债权往往与非法集资有着千丝万缕的联系,本文将从庭外重组中涉非(涉嫌非法集资)敏感债权处置角度出发,具体分析敏感债权处置方案中的重点法律问题,以及律师在涉非敏感债权处置中的作用。
一、敏感债权的概念与特征
(一)敏感债权的概念
正如庭外重组一样,对于敏感债权,法律尚未给出明确的定义。结合过往庭外重组等债务风险处置案例,可以将敏感债权理解为:因涉及众多自然人债权人,可能涉嫌非法集资,而需要在债务处置中特别考虑的债权,主要包括涉及个人的理财产品和民间集资。
(二)敏感债权的特征
敏感债权的主要特点如下:
1. 债权人一般为自然人,且人数众多,具有涉众性特点。敏感债权一般涉及众多自然人债权人,这类群体抗风险能力一般较差,企业债务危机爆发后,如果无法及时清偿敏感债权,可能诱发群体性事件,影响社会稳定。
The Federal Court in Morgan, in the matter of Traditional Values Management Limited (in liq)[2024] FCA 74, approved an abridged process that allowed the liquidator to admit debts of a group of unsecured creditors without requiring a formal proof of debt.
Key Takeaways
In this week’s TGIF, we consider ASIC v Bettles [2023] FCA 975 and ASIC v Jones [2023] WASCA 130, two cases which bring into focus the conduct of insolvency practitioners and alleged abrogation of their duties and independence.
Key takeaways
In this week’s TGIF, we consider Jahani, in the matter of Ralan Property Services Pty Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) (in liq) [2023] FCA 738, a Federal Court decision approving the liquidators’ entry into funding agreements.
Key takeaways
In this week’s TGIF, we consider the Court of Appeal’s decision in Anchorage Capital Master Offshore Ltd v Sparkes [2023] NSWCA 88 and the challenges faced by lenders in accepting representations as to solvency and the financial position of borrowers.
Key takeaways
This week’s, TGIF considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in Westgem Investments Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd [2022] WASCA 132, handed down on 4 November 2022 in favour of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd and Lloyds Banking Group (Financiers).
Key takeaways
This week’s TGIF considers a recent case where the Supreme Court of Queensland rejected a director’s application to access an executory contract of sale entered into by receivers and managers on the basis it was not a ‘financial record’
Key Takeaways
This week’s TGIF looks at the decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Donoghue v Russells (A Firm)[2021] FCA 798 in which Mr Donoghue appealed a decision to make a sequestration order which was premised on him ‘carrying on business in Australia' for the purpose of section 43(1)(b)(iii) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (Act).
Key Takeaways