The Supreme Court has today considerably expanded the “good faith” defence for voidable transactions.
Where a creditor “gave value” through the original transaction, that creditor can now defeat a voidable transaction claim by proving only that it acted in good faith, with no suspicion of insolvency.
We picked the good faith defence in the voidable preference regime as one of the big five insolvency issues for 2013 and so it has come to pass, with a wealth of case law on the topic.
The “good faith” defence for creditors facing insolvent transaction claims has now been fully explored by the Court of Appeal in two separate judgments relating to the Farrell v Fences and Kerbs Limited1 litigation – and has been confirmed on all points to have narrow application.
Liquidators’ ability to recover funds for unsecured creditors has been strengthened in one context and weakened in another by two recent court judgments.
The Court of Appeal in Farrell v Fences & Kerbs Limited1 has overturned previous decisions from the High Court, which had considerably widened the availability of the “good faith” defence for creditors. But the finding is interim only, subject to a further hearing on a closely related issue.
A recent decision of the Court of Appeal (Farrell v Fences & Kerbs Limited [2013] NZCA 91) will make it very difficult for creditors to successfully raise the good faith defence under section 296(3) of the Companies Act 1993 to a voidable claim by a liquidator.
The Wellington litigation team successfully defended a voidable transaction claim under section 296(3) of the Companies Act 1993 by the liquidators of Contract Engineering Limited in the High Court in Farrell v ACME Engineering Limited [2012] NZHC 2874.
ACME Engineering manufactured and delivered a flash silencer to Contract Engineering in May 2010 and issued an invoice for it. The invoice was paid late and pursuant to a payment plan. Contract was placed into receivership in late 2010 and then into liquidation in July 2011.
The High Court has clarified the extended good faith defence, introduced into the Companies Act in 2007, for creditors facing ‘claw back’ of a payment by liquidators.1
The Court’s interpretation, while good news for creditors, may make it more difficult for liquidators to recover insolvent transactions.
The 2007 amendment to section 296(3)
Case law on the new insolvent transactions regime is scarce, even though the changes were introduced three years ago. The High Court's recent decision in Blanchett v McEntee Hire Holdings Limited examines, for the first time in New Zealand, central principles in the new voidable transactions regime.
This issue reviews the most important recent changes to the regime of challenging transactions made by debtors in anticipation of insolvency. These changes were introduced in the Resolution adopted at the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation (the “Supreme Commercial Court”) No. 63 “Certain Matters Relating to the Application of Chapter III.1 of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”1 dated 23 December 2010 (the “Resolution”).2
This legal update gives an overview of the key amendments to Federal Law No 127 - FZ "On insolvency (bankruptcy)" dated 26 October 2002 (the Insolvency Law) and Federal Law No 40 - FZ "On insolvency (bankruptcy) of credit organisations" dated 25 February 1999 (the Insolvency Law of Credit Organisations).
On 17 April 2009 the Russian State Duma adopted Federal Law No 73 - FZ - "On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation" (the 73-FZ Law).