We discuss the Federal Court of Australia’s judgment and distil insights to assist trustees in bankruptcy navigate difficult estates and deal with recalcitrant bankrupts.
Introduction
In a recent case, the early restructuring was proven as a useful tool for practitioners in circumstances where there is value in moving quickly to affect the restructure prior to the first meeting of creditors.
Case Analysis: Re Richstone Plumbing Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2023] VSC 112
Facts
Richstone Group was a large plumbing contractor, who, due to matters including the economic conditions of the construction industry, earlier this year sought to implement a restructure to continue trading.
What is a Bankruptcy Notice?
On 14 September 2023, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) released Consultation Paper 372 "Guidance on insolvent trading safe harbour provisions: Update to RG 217".
The Western Australia Court of Appeal has provided clarity concerning insolvency practitioner independence following pre-administration services and whether those pre-administration services can disentitle insolvency practitioners to remuneration.
In the matter of Premier Energy Resources Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1185, the Administrator unsuccessfully sought an order validating his appointment where he failed to investigate allegations that his appointment documents included a director’s forged letter of resignation.
Key takeaways
Is a court order necessary for security interests granted after the appointment of external administrators? Perhaps not.
This week’s TGIF summarises the Federal Court of Australia’s recent decision granting leave to proceed against a company despite the appointment of a small business restructuring (SBR) practitioner under Pt 5.3B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act).
Key takeaways
In FamilyMart China Holding Co Ltd (Respondent) v Ting Chuan (Cayman Islands) Holding Corporation (Appellant) (Cayman Islands) [2023] UKPC 33, the Privy Council has provided useful guidance about the interplay between an arbitration agreement and exercise of the Cayman court’s powers and discretion to wind up a company on just and equitable grounds.
In a case that unfolded on May 1, 2018, the Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered the winding up of Day & Night Online Transport Pty Ltd. This was ordered because of the company’s failure to comply with a statutory demand from a creditor, as outlined in section 459C(2)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). However, what followed was a legal journey that ultimately resulted in the rescission of the winding-up order, shedding light on critical aspects of corporate insolvency and the legal processes involved.
Background: The Winding-Up Order