In Berryman v Zurich Australia Ltd, the Supreme Court of Western Australia considered the claim of a bankrupt who had brought an action against his insurance company for breach of contract following its denial of his total disability claim (the bankrupt had claimed under the policy for A$2m).
Australian-listed Slater & Gordon, the world’s first publicly traded law firm, is preparing to post what is understood to be legal sector’s biggest ever annual loss. A profit warning filed with the Australian Securities Exchange, reveals the firm's full-year net loss after tax for the year ended 30 June is expected to total A$1,017.6m.
In Evans v Jones the directors of a liquidated company sought to defend a claim brought by the liquidators that loan repayments were insolvent transactions by asserting that the company was balance-sheet solvent at the time of the transactions. The directors based this claim on the company having contingent assets in the form of dividend payments (to the directors) that were later found to be unlawful.
On 25 May 2016, the Insolvency Service published a consultation paper aimed at reforming various aspects of the UK's corporate insolvency regime. It has now collected responses from various interested parties including Dentons. Some proposals focus on the issue of rescue finance, and how to make sure businesses have access to suitable finance to continue to trade out of financial difficulty or achieve a suitable restructuring.
On 25 May, the Insolvency Service published a consultation paper on options for reform of the UK's corporate insolvency regime. Their impetus is for the UK to remain at the forefront of insolvency best practice to ensure businesses, investors and creditors remain confident that best outcomes can be achieved when faced with financial difficulty, and to give a company the best possible chance to restructure its debts and return to profitability while protecting employees and creditors.
In 2014, Forge Group Construction Pty (Forge) went into liquidation. Receivers were also appointed. The Forge insolvency has already been the subject of litigation in the Australian courts in respect of certain Australian PPSA issues (see our previous summary here).
In Australian Securities & Investment Commission v Planet Platinum Ltd [2016] VSC 120, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) sought, and was granted, a declaration from the Supreme Court of Victoria that the appointment of the administrator of Planet Platinum Ltd (Planet Platinum) was invalid and of no effect.
A proposed shakeup of the UK’s corporate insolvency regime will impose a three month freeze on legal action against stressed businesses who are investigating rescue options. In addition to this moratorium, measures have been suggested to help businesses to continue trading through the restructuring process. The intention is that this will prevent struggling companies being held to ransom by key suppliers, and will also assist in developing flexible restructuring plans. The proposal would make rescue schemes binding, even on secured creditors.
Mr and Ms Moncur were the sole directors and effective owners of Monocrane NZ (Monocrane). Following their separation, they entered into a relationship property agreement under which Mr Moncur assumed full ownership and control of Monocrane, including agreeing to assume sole responsibility for the overdrawn shareholders' current account. In return, Ms Moncur agreed to resign her directorship, transfer her shares to Mr Moncur and pay various joint debts.
Mr Kamal was appointed as liquidator of two companies of which the Commissioner of Inland Revenue (CIR) was a creditor. The CIR applied to the High Court for orders under section 286(5) of the Companies Act 1993 prohibiting Mr Kamal from acting as a company liquidator for a period of up to five years.
In CIR v Kamal [2016] NZHC 1053 the CIR sought the orders on the basis that Mr Kamal was guilty of a continuing breach of his duties as a liquidator that made him unfit to act as a liquidator because: