The recent decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal in Re Willmott Forests Limited (Receivers and Managers appointed) (in liquidation) [2012] VSCA 202 gives liquidators comfort when disclaiming leases (as the liquidator of a landlord) pursuant to s 568(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (‘the Act’).
Gothard v Fell; in the matter of Allco Financial Group Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) (in liq) (2012) 88 ACSR 328
On 15 May 2012, Jacobson J of the Federal Court of Australia allowed an application by Receivers to be released from confidentiality undertakings so that use could be made of Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) examination transcripts.
In the recent Court of Appeal decision of Re Willmott Forests Ltd [2012] VSC 29, the Court held that a lessee’s leasehold interest can be extinguished by a liquidator appointed to a lessor company using the disclaimer power in s 568 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Act).
Facts
In Grapecorp Management Pty Ltd (in liq) v Grape Exchange Management Euston Pty Ltd [2012] VSC 112, Grape Exchange Management Euston Pty Ltd (Grape Exchange) managed a vineyard for Grapecorp Management Pty Ltd (Grapecorp).
Receivers and employees are the greatest losers from a recent chain of court cases. Unless overturned on appeal or by legislation, the cases impose financial burdens on employees and administrative burdens on receivers.
At stake are employees' accrued leave entitlements and the statutory requirement to pay them once a company enters external administration. Employees of companies in receivership can lose entitlements they would ordinarily receive during liquidation depending entirely on the time at which a company enters administration or liquidation.
In light of the modern trend towards “pre-pack” arrangements as a legitimate restructuring solution, a recent judgment handed down in the Federal Court provides a timely reminder for insolvency practitioners that independence is paramount and liquidators can be removed upon the application of a creditor in circumstances where there is a perception of conflict.
While the winding up of a company is a last resort in the context of shareholder oppression, the discretion to order a winding up will be exercised by the Courts if the circumstances dictate that it is the most appropriate remedy, such as where it will provide finality and certainty for the shareholders without undermining the value of the company’s projects to a potential purchaser on winding up.
On 2 July 2012 the Australian Securities and Investment Commission launched a new website for the publication of insolvency and other notices.
The site provides a centralised and consolidated medium for the publication of insolvency related notices required by the Corporations legislation. Formerly, such notices were publicised through newspapers and other print media, and in some instances as this, systems transition continue to be published on both due to transactional issues.
The website was announced in late 2011, but only came in effect on 2 July 2012.
A particular focus of the inquiry will be the consequences of such insolvencies for sub-contractors.
In the wake of a recent spate of contractors becoming insolvent, the NSW Government has announced an inquiry into insolvency in the construction industry and is seeking submissions from interested parties. Submissions to the inquiry are due by 14 September 2012.
The proposed scaling back of directors' liability provisions is good news for insolvency practitioners.
In good news for insolvency practitioners, the NSW Government formally adopted the Council of Australian Governments guidelines on "Personal Liability for Corporate Fault" as NSW policy on 31 July 2012 .
What are the "Personal Liability for Corporate Fault" guidelines?