Debts claimed in statutory demands must be due and payable to the creditor named in the statutory demand.

When disputing statutory demands it is common for debtor companies to argue an offsetting claim, so as to reduce or extinguish the amount claimed in the statutory demand.

For there to be a valid offsetting claim there must be ‘mutuality’, meaning that the legal capacities in which both the offsetting claim and the statutory demand debt are each claimed and owed must align.

Het einde van 2014 nadert met rasse schreden. Om een liquidatie, juridische fusie of splitsing voor het einde van het jaar te voltooien, dienen bepaalde termijnen in acht te worden genomen. Hieronder treft u een procesbeschrijving van deze frequent gebruikte herstructureringsinstrumenten aan.

Fusie / splitsing

Op 3 september 2014 heeft de regering een wetsvoorstel (het ‘Wetsvoorstel”) ingediend waardoor een bestuursverbod kan worden opgelegd voor maximaal 5 jaar aan bij faillissement betrokken personen aan wie een verwijt kan worden gemaakt voor de oorzaak van dat faillissement.

Inleiding

Op dit moment bestaat er al een aantal civielrechtelijke instrumenten om fraude of wanbeleid bij rechtspersonen aan te pakken zoals:

A recent Victorian case has worrying implications for financiers and creditors.

A decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal in Vasudevan v Becon Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2014] VSCA 14 has the potential to significantly broaden the power of a liquidator to attack a company transaction under section 588FDA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Act) where there are ‘indirect benefits’ to a director or close associate of a director of the company.

In een recente uitspraak heeft het Hof Den Bosch een nadere uitwerking gegeven van de werking van artikel 61 van de Faillissementswet (“Fw”), die van belang is voor ondernemers die gehuwd zijn na het maken van huwelijkse voorwaarden (Hof Den Bosch 12 augustus 2014, GHSHE:2014:2773).

Huwelijkse voorwaarden en faillissement

Obtain advice before you lodge a proof of debt or vote in a liquidation

Secured creditors should remember that submitting a proof of debt and voting in a liquidation may result in the loss of their security if they get it wrong.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales has delivered a timely reminder to secured creditors of a company in liquidation, where the secured creditor lost its security because it submitted a proof of debt for the full amount of its debt and voted on a poll at a creditor’s meeting for its full debt.

Liquidators are commonly appointed to a company where, prior to liquidation the company was a trustee of a trust. Often when the liquidators are appointed, the company has ceased to be the trustee and a replacement trustee has not been appointed.

In these circumstances, the company in liquidation is a bare trustee in relation to the trust assets and the liquidator will assume this role until a replacement trustee is appointed. Often a replacement trustee is not appointed.

Does the liquidator as bare trustee have a power to sell trust assets?

Secured creditors should not allow a liquidator to sell a secured asset without first:

If your terms of trade documents don’t have the correct provisions, you can lose goods supplied to a customer that becomes insolvent, even though you may have title to the goods.

A recent Supreme Court decision highlights the need for retention of title suppliers to have adequate terms of trade documents and to register security interests on the Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR) to avoid losing assets if a customer becomes insolvent.

On March 7, 2014 the Spanish Government approved the Royal Decree Law 4/2014 adopting urgent measures on debt refinancing and restructuring ("Real Decreto-ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes en material de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial" or "RDL 4/2014").