In our December 2012 insolvency update we reported on CP Asset Management Ltd v Grant, in which the High Court upheld a creditors' resolution to appoint new liquidators. The High Court found that a resolution should only be set aside when it was found that the prejudice to creditors was unreasonable. In the High Court, the minority of creditors who voted against the resolution were unable to e
Wentworth Metals Group Pty Ltd (Wentworth) applied under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act), for a review by the Federal Court of Australia of a decision by the liquidators of Bonython Metals Group Pty Ltd to sell Bonython's interest in a joint venture mining project to Pure Metals Pty Ltd.
Re Tames involved an application for the Court to approve a debtor's proposal to creditors under section 333 of the Insolvency Act. The applicant was the provisional trustee for the proposal and sought the Court's approval of the proposal's terms. If the proposal was accepted, Ms Tames (the debtor) would only pay $0.05 on the dollar to her unsecured creditors. The application for approval was opposed by ASB, one of Ms Tames' unsecured creditors.
In the Court of Appeal decision of Herbert v New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Limited, the Court declined to grant Mrs Herbert's appeal in relation to the High Court's refusal to approve her creditor's proposal (see the summary in our October 2011 update).
As noted in our recent insolvency law update, the Western Australian Court of Appeal has recently delivered its judgment (comprising over 1,000 pages) on one of Australia's longest running pieces of litigation: Westpac Banking Corporation v The Bell Group (in liq) [No 3].
In the case of In Re Silverdale Developments (2007) Ltd (In Liq): Bunting v Buchanan [2012] NZHC 766, the shareholders of Silver Developments (2007) Limited (in liquidation) unsuccessfully applied to the Court to terminate the liquidation under section 250 of the Companies Act 1993.
In Perpetual Trustee Company Limited v Downey & Black, the High Court discussed the effect of the liquidation process on a choice of forum clause in a commercial contract. It found that as the subject company, HIH, had been placed into liquidation, the choice of forum clause between HIH and Perpetual (which designated the New South Wales Courts as the forum for resolution of disputes) did not automatically operate. Instead, the question became whether the New Zealand or NSW courts were the more appropriate venue.
Fortress Credit Corporation (Australia) II Pty Ltd v Fletcher [2011] FACFC 89 concerned the powers of liquidators in Australia. In 2009, joint liquidators were appointed to Octaviar Limited (Octaviar) and Octaviar Administration (Funder). Fortress claimed to be a secured creditor of Octaviar under a charge, and was owed approximately $71 million. The liquidators arranged for Octaviar and the Funder to enter into funding agreements that provided for the Funder to fund an investigation into the actions of Fortress and to commence litigation against Fortress.
In our December 2010 insolvency update, we reported on the UK High Court's decision in BNY Corporate Trustee Services Limited v Eurosail.
The mere existence of a secured remedy against another party is not a substantial ground for refusing to allow a creditor to pursue a remedy against a guarantor.