This week’s TGIF examines a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria in which an unfair preference claim was defended on the basis that the liquidators had been invalidly appointed and lacked standing to continue the proceeding.
Key takeaways
Commercial landlords are exposed to a range of risks from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. One new risk to be confronted will come from the increased prevalence of rental deferrals and interaction with the Australian insolvency regime over ‘unfair preferences’.
Why is rent ‘protected’ in normal trading conditions?
This week’s TGIF considers the decision in Cant v Mad Brothers Earthmoving Pty Ltd[2020] VSCA 198, where the Court of Appeal refused to find that a payment made by a third party on behalf of an insolvent company was an unfair preference.
Key takeaways
This week’s TGIF considers a recent decision of the Federal Court which demonstrates that, irrespective of the COVID-19 landscape, the Court will continue to support administrators acting to maximise a return for creditors and stakeholders.
Key takeaways
In continuation of Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) efforts to ease financial stress caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the RBI issued the circular on the Resolution Framework for Covid-19 Related Stress dated 6 August 2020 (August 6 Circular). The August 6 Circular creates a limited time window for certain categories of borrowers affected by Covid-19 pandemic related business disruption to be allowed resolution plans in the nature of restructuring while permitting the borrower accounts to retain their status as ‘standard’.
This week's TGIF considers the recent Federal Court case of Krejci, in the matter of Union Standard International Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) (No 2) [2020] FCA 1111, where the Federal Court ordered the director of a company to disclose passwords to the company’s server
Background:
This week’s TGIF considers the recent decision of the NSW Court of Appeal in the Arrium liquidation, where the Court set aside examination orders sought for the purpose of a possible shareholder class action.
Key takeaways
On 24 July 2020, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), in its decision in GRIDCO Limited v Surya Kanta Sathapathy and Others [C.A. (AT) (Insolvency) 1271 of 2019] (GRIDCO judgement), held that the termination of a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) during the subsistence of a moratorium would be in violation of Section 14(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC). FACTUAL BACKGROUND |
Administrators unsuccessfully argued that rent incurred during the administrators’ statutory “no personal liability” period was an unsecured debt which would not enjoy priority in the event the relevant companies went into liquidation.
Key takeaways