On 23 June 2017, a reform to the Federal Criminal Code was enacted to classify the criminal offense of “illegal extrajudicial debt collection” established in article 284 Bis.
Ever since the Companies Act, 2008 came into force, the courts have been inundated with cases pertaining to the interplay between the moratorium established by business rescue, the creditors’ claims and the effect of the business rescue plan.
The UAE has issued by Decree Federal Law No. (10) of 2018 on Netting (theUAE Netting Law), with the aim of strengthening the regulatory framework for the settlement of obligations arising from qualified financial contracts. Parties to a contract previously relied on Article 183 of Federal Law No. (9) of 2016 on Bankruptcy (the Bankruptcy Law) to settle debts agreed to under a contract, provided that it is within the context of insolvency and that such contract does not fall within the claw-back provisions (Article 168 of the Bankruptcy Law).
This week’s TGIF considers Tai-Soo Suk v Hanjin Shopping Co Ltd [2016] FCA 1404 in which the Court was required to determine the scope of a stay arising under the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross Border Insolvency.
BACKGROUND
A Korean shipping company was subject to ‘rehabilitation’ proceedings in Korea. Rehabilitation proceedings seek to ‘rehabilitate’ insolvent debtors by restructuring their debt pursuant to a rehabilitation plan approved by the creditors and the Rehabilitation Court.
This week’s TGIF considers the case of Compton v Ramsay Health Care Australia Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC 106, where the Court exercised its power to “go behind” a judgment upon which a petitioning creditor relied as proof of a debt that was owed.
WHAT HAPPENED?
This week’s TGIF considers the case of Brandon Industries (Vic) Pty Ltd v Locker Pty Ltd [2016] VSC 373 where the Court dismissed an application to set aside a statutory demand due to the applicant’s failure to establish a genuine dispute or offsetting claim pursuant to section 459H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
BACKGROUND
This week’s TGIF considers the decision in Hussain v CSR Building Products Limited, in the matter of FPJ Group Pty Ltd (In Liq), in which an ROT clause was held to be a “security”, defeating the liquidators’ unfair preference claim.
Background
On 18 July 2014, FPJ Group Pty Ltd (FPJ Group) was wound up in insolvency.
In Sharpe v WH Bailey & Sons Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 921, Justice Gleeson found that the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (NSW) (FDM Act) did not operate to prevent an individual from pursuing their rights under the Bankruptcy Act1966 (Cth), even though those rights may have been related to a farm mortgage. In doing so, Justice Gleeson confirmed that the Bankruptcy Act1966 (Cth) will have priority over the FDM Act where the requirements of section 5 of the FDM Act are met.
FACTS
In the matter ofMustang Marine Australia Services Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1074, Brereton J of the New South Wales Supreme Court held that there is no principle that before instituting proceedings a liquidator must be satisfied of the material facts that constitute its cause of action, and that absent such satisfaction the proceedings are an abuse of process. As long as proceedings are instituted for bona fide relief claimed and are not doomed then there is no abuse of process.
FACTS
The NSW Supreme Court has given a Landlord leave to commence proceedings against a company for rent and make good costs arising after the date of the DOCA.
BACKGROUND