Will a Court order security for costs against a liquidator with litigation funding? Not always, as a recent decision of the NSW Supreme Court made clear.
Background
The defendant was the director of a company (Commercial Indemnity Pty Ltd or ‘Commercial Indemnity’) which provided agency services for commercial and industrial rental and petroleum bonds.
This week’s TGIF considers a recent insolvent trading claim involving novel questions in relation to privilege against self-incrimination and the apportionment of liability between successive directors.
Background
This week’s TGIF considers the decision of AIG Australia Limited v Kaboko Mining Limited [2019] FCAFC 96, in which the Full Federal Court found that an insolvency exclusion in a D&O policy did not apply to exclude claims brought against directors and officers of a company under external administration.
What happened?
En una nota que redacté ya hace algún tiempo decía que, excepcionalmente, y aunque la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil (LEC) parece excluirlo al disponer que la legitimación activa corresponde a quien aparece en el título como «acreedor» (art. 538.2), ha interpretado la jurisprudencia que puede ser el propio condenado o demandado quien inste la ejecución si tiene interés jurídico en el cumplimiento.
This week’s TGIF considers Re GGA Lifestyle Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed); Ex Parte Woodhouse [2019] WASC 167, where the Supreme Court of Western Australia clarified that a voluntary administrator of a company in administration is able to claim costs of care, preservation and realisation of partnership assets of the company in administration through an equitable lien in the same way liquidators can.
What happened?
Se exponen brevemente los posibles obstáculos a la ejecución de la resolución (sentencia o decreto del letrado de la Administración de Justicia) que pone fin al procedimiento de liquidación del régimen económico matrimonial de gananciales y se ofrecen los criterios para su superación.
1.ª ¿Es la sentencia que pone fin al procedimiento con oposición un título ejecutivo?
El artículo 728.1 de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil (LEC) regula este presupuesto de las medidas cautelares de una manera flexible, ya que, como ha recordado la jurisprudencia, no requiere (como hacía el Anteproyecto de LEC) que la sentencia condenatoria que en su día se dicte sea «de imposible o muy difícil ejecución», sino que se limita a exigir que puedan producirse situaciones que «impidieren o dificultaren la efectividad de la tutela».
Sin embargo, la jurisprudencia que lo ha interpretado ha sido rigurosa en la delimitación de sus requisitos.
This week’s TGIF considers the recent case of Halifax Investment Services Pty Ltd (In liquidation) (No 4) [2019] FCA 604 where the Federal Court granted an application by liquidators of a company to electronically publish notices required to be sent to creditors as part of their initial reporting obligations in a winding up, to save costs and time, in cir
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 a recent decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal where a company’s creditors successfully opposed an application by the company’s liquidators to compromise proceedings commenced on the company’s behalf.