Concurrent appointments and priority creditors – who may distribute pursuant to section 561 of the Corporations Act?
In Kirman v RWE Robinson & Sons Pty Ltd (in liq), in the matter of RWE Robinson and Sons Pty Ltd (in liq) [2019] FCA 372, the Court helpfully clarifies who is entitled to make payments to priority creditors in scenarios where receivers and liquidators are concurrently appointed. Background RWE Robinson & Sons Pty Ltd […]
ReadmoreRed card for borrower claiming application fee as penalty
With the recent lending slowdown in the Australian banking sector, lead by the Banking Royal Commission, tougher lending standards and tighter serviceability requirements, demand for alternative non-bank lenders continues to increase. It is common for a non-bank lender’s lending terms to include an up-front arrangement or origination fee in respect of the establishment of the […]
ReadmoreCulture-related Regulatory Enforcement: Where might the Australian ‘BEAR’ go hunting?
This two-part briefing has been prepared for in-house legal, risk and compliance professionals in financial services firms, including insurance and superannuation entities. Part one of this briefing covers the following matters: Introduction to the “Banking Executive Accountability Regime” (BEAR) What is required under the regime and penalties for individuals and companies BEAR’s imminent expansion to […]
ReadmoreService of a creditor’s statutory demand – the importance of serving at the registered office maintained by ASIC
The recent decision of Mills Oakley v Asset HQ Australia Pty Ltd [2019] VSC 98 highlights the need for strict compliance when serving a creditor’s statutory demand on the registered office of a company. The Court considered whether a creditor’s statutory demand, with an error in the registered address of the company, was served in accordance with […]
ReadmoreLiquidator’s application to obtain greater role in managed investment scheme winding up
In LM Investment Management Limited v Whyte [2019] QSC 233, the Supreme Court of Queensland considered an application by a Liquidator to: replace the court-appointed Receiver in the winding up of a managed investment scheme as well as for a complex remuneration and costs regime to be put in place; and to access the scheme property in […]
ReadmoreLiquidator’s remuneration from trust assets – the next instalment
In LM Investment Management Limited & Anor Whyte [2019] QSC 245, the Supreme Court of Queensland considered an application by the Liquidator of LM Investment Management Limited (LM), for payment of some or all of his remuneration from trust property. The trust property comprised by a number of registered investment schemes, including the LM First Mortgage Income […]
ReadmoreSend it to the right person: the importance of accurate notices terminating options
In JPA Finance Pty Ltd v Gordon Nominees Pty Ltd,[1] the Supreme Court of Victoria held that a notice purportedly terminating an option to purchase 20 units in a trust for $2.3M was invalid. This was because it was not addressed in accordance with the contract. Instead of being addressed to the company care of its lawyers, […]
ReadmoreInvolved or not involved? That is the question for partners.
It is well established that the privilege against self-incrimination and privilege from exposure to civil penalties can be claimed by natural persons and are not available to corporations. However, the position is not yet settled insofar as it relates to partnerships. More specifically, whether all partners can claim the privileges or whether it can only […]
ReadmoreLife cycle of litigation beyond life: deceased estates
What do you do when there is no-one to sue? In the Supreme and County Courts in Victoria, there is a civil procedure when the defendant is deceased or dies and a cause of action survives. See below our overview of this procedure. Click here to view the full size PDF. […]
ReadmoreFMCG Express | September Edition
Gadens has brought together a selection of articles from our top lawyers operating across the FMCG sector, to bring you the September edition of the FMCG Express. Covering recent stories such as the Kraft vs Bega dispute, the advertising campaign by Ad Standards and Hells Angels Motorcycle Corporation (Australia) Pty Limited v Redbubble Limited [2019] […]
ReadmoreFederal Court finds ticket reseller engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct
In the recent case of ACCC v Viagogo AG, the Federal Court considered whether Viagogo engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by acting in a way liable to mislead consumers when reselling event tickets in breach of the Australian Consumer Law. This decision is a reminder to businesses to accurately describe the nature of the products or services […]
ReadmoreAFCA now considering legacy complaints dating back to 2008
Until June 2020, AFCA can consider certain Legacy Complaints dating back to 1 January 2008 when administering the AFCA external dispute resolution scheme. This may pose evidentiary challenges both in terms of retention of relevant documents and staff recollection of events which occurred over a decade ago. The expansion of AFCA’s jurisdiction also means that […]
Readmore
