On 24 November 2009, ASIC released Consultation Paper 124 which provides guidance for directors on their duty to prevent insolvent trading which is imposed by section 588G of the Corporations Act 2001.
The economic climate over the past two years has seen a growing number of corporate insolvencies. There is also evidence that directors, and particularly directors of small to medium size enterprises, do not fully understand their duty to prevent insolvent trading.
Directors and officers of corporations are often subject to potential personal liabilities as a result of their positions. This potential for personal liability may be increased in the insolvency context, where a corporation’s creditors will seek to collect on certain debts from alternate sources, such as directors and officers. Directors and officers often utilize insurance and various court mechanisms in order to mitigate their personal liabilities.
If Departmental activity, debate in Parliament and media articles are an indication, the Federal Government’s much awaited response to the Ripoll Report is imminent.
What is a debt restructuring?
The aim of any restructuring (also sometimes called a workout) is to rearrange the debtor’s financial commitments so that it is able to service its restructured debts and survive as a going concern. It is important to note that this is a consensual process and is not undertaken under the supervision of a court or other supervisory body - therefore, it is important the all creditors are involved.
If it’s voluntary, how does it work?
On 27 August 2006, the PRC National People’s Congress passed a new Enterprise Insolvency Law (the “Law”) after more than a decade’s preparation and debate. The Law, which will become effective on 1 June 2007, introduces a formal insolvency process applying to a wide range of legal entities. The Law only contains general principles which in practice are unlikely to provide sufficient protection to creditors’ interests.
Scope of application
Introduction
Gothard v Fell; in the matter of Allco Financial Group Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) (in liq) (2012) 88 ACSR 328
On 15 May 2012, Jacobson J of the Federal Court of Australia allowed an application by Receivers to be released from confidentiality undertakings so that use could be made of Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) examination transcripts.
Before 1993, the question of whether a creditor of a corporation being wound up had received an unfair preference from that corporation was determined under section 122 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth). In 1993, a new Part 5.7B was inserted into the Corporations Act to deal with voidable transactions such as unfair preferences. Since then two lines of divergent judicial authority have developed:
Summary
In an exciting week for insolvency, the Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law has released a package of reforms to Australia’s corporate insolvency laws. This reform package includes:
The highly publicized announcement by Nortel Networks Corporation (together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “Nortel”) of its intention to sell certain of its businesses has provided an opportunity for the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to settle the state of the law in Ontario (and, hopefully, across Canada) on the sale of all or substantially all of an entity’s assets within a Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”) proceedings.