In brief

"All happy families are alike, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. With apologies to Tolstoy, the Akhmedov family is one of the unhappiest ever to have appeared in my courtroom." – Mrs. Justice Knowles

Voluntary administration is Australia’s primary business rescue regime. This article is Part 2 of a two-part series. In this article, we highlight the impact of voluntary administration on various stakeholders and the potential outcomes for a company in voluntary administration. It is not intended to be used as an exhaustive guide to Australia’s voluntary administration regime and its many nuances.

Voluntary administration is Australia’s primary business rescue regime. This article is Part 1 of a two-part series. This article provides an introductory overview of voluntary administration in Australia, explaining what it is, why entities might enter it and its processes. It is not intended to be used as an exhaustive guide to Australia’s voluntary administration regime and its many nuances.

It is important for a receiver or voluntary administrator to ensure that a proper sales process is undertaken relevant to the circumstances as there is no "one-size-fits-all" approach.

From 1 October 2021, the temporary restrictions in Schedule 10 of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) are being replaced[1].

These changes lift the current restrictions on issuing winding up petitions, and replaces them with less stringent and more refined restrictions which are due to remain in place until 31 March 2022.

As the public may be aware, there are ways to put a company into liquidation, one of which is what is called “soft-touch” liquidation. The definition of the soft-touch liquidation was set out in a British Virgin Islands judgment — Re Constellation Overseas Ltd BVIHC (Com) 2018/0206, 0207, 0208, 0210 & 0212. It was held that the essence of a soft-touch provisional liquidation is that a company remains under the day- to-day control of the directors but is protected against actions by individual creditors.

High Court sanctions scheme of arrangement proposed by the Provident Finance group

In our earlier blog, we considered the application to strike out the challenge against the Caffè Nero company voluntary arrangement (“CVA”) (Nero Holdings Ltd v Young) and the rejection of Caffè Nero’s strike-out action by the Court.

While testators generally have freedom to decide how to dispose of their assets in England and Wales, there are limits to this freedom, including where a beneficiary of the estate is made bankrupt. If the testator passes away during the course of the beneficiary’s bankruptcy, the legacy will usually pass to the trustee in bankruptcy for the benefit of creditors instead of to the beneficiary.

When a plaintiff obtains judgment against an insured but insolvent defendant in the Cayman Islands is the plaintiff entitled to the policy proceeds or do they have to be paid to the liquidator for the benefit of the defendant's creditors? The answer is yes when the claim involves a vehicle but is less clear in other cases. This article considers the arguments for and against a plaintiff being entitled to the policy proceeds in cases that do not involve a vehicle.

Background