On 17 May 2017, the UK Supreme Court handed down judgment in proceedings - commonly known as the Waterfall I litigation - to determine claims with regard to the estimated £8 billion surplus arising in the estate of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (LBIE).
The statutory demand process is widely used by companies wishing to secure prompt payment of debts owing by companies registered in Australia. This article will look at a company's options for dealing with a statutory demand.
What is a statutory demand?
Introduction
The Sapin II Act of November 8 2016 amended the regime governing directors' liability in an insolvency scenario in order to encourage the recovery of honest directors of failed businesses.
During the past several weeks the Azerbaijani Parliament has adopted a number of laws, introducing amendments to the Law On Banks, the Civil Code, the Civil Procedure Code, the Administrative Procedure Code, the Law On Telecommunications and the Law On Licenses and Permits.
We summarize the major aspects of above-mentioned amendments below.
Law “On Introducing Amendments to the Law 'On Banks'"
The Sapin II Act of November 8 2016 amended the regime governing directors' liability in an insolvency scenario in order to encourage the recovery of honest directors of failed businesses.
A recent challenge in the High Court by liquidators to recover assets from a director of an insolvent company has highlighted various points of company law. In particular, the court had to consider directors' authority, share buybacks, and transactions between a company and its directors.
The claimant (D) was the managing director and controlling shareholder of the defendant company (the Company). The Company at first had one other director, D's wife, and later a second (W).
The liquidator challenged three transactions:
On April 7, 2017, the Azerbaijani Parliament passed in the first reading a Draft Law “On Introducing Amendments to the Law "On Banks" (the “Draft Law”).
Background
Peter Oreb and Ingrid Webber were directors of a group of companies supplying workforce solutions to some of the largest corporations in the world. Four of the companies went into liquidation. Prior to the companies going into liquidation, Peter and Ingrid resigned as directors of those companies.
Background
In 2009, the Calgary Airport Authority (CAA) entered into a construction agreement with Iona Contractors Ltd. for Iona to improve CAA’s north airfield. By October 2010, the work was substantially complete; however CAA withheld further payment to Iona on the basis that some of Iona’s subcontractors remained unpaid. Iona assigned into bankruptcy and a dispute arose over the entitlement to the withheld amounts (the Funds).
In a much anticipated judgment, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of NSW has delivered good news for insolvency practitioners concerning their remuneration. This news will be particularly welcome for those practitioners who accept appointments over small to medium sized companies.