The decision of the High Court of Australia in Ramsay Health Care Australia Pty Ltd v Compton [2017] HCA 28; 261 CLR 132 (Ramsay) clarified the limits of a Bankruptcy Court's discretion to "go behind" a judgment, that is, to investigate whether the underlying debt relied upon for the making of a sequestration order is, in truth and reality, owing to the petitioning creditor. Recently, the Ramsay decision was applied by the Federal Court of Australia in Dunkerley v Comcare [2019] FCA 1002 (Dunkerley).
Liquidators have more certainty about their ability to disclaim the environmental liabilities and responsibilities of a company in liquidation.
Australia, Queensland, Company & Commercial, Environment & Climate Change, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Clayton Utz, Environmental protection, Liquidation, Corporations Act 2001 (Australia), Queensland Supreme Court
The liquidators were not bound to cause Linc to comply with the EPO from the date of the disclaimer.
Australia, Queensland, Environment & Climate Change, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Clayton Utz