Liquidator’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 […]
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 […]
ReadmoreEmployees’ priority in the insolvency of a trading trust: the Amerind case in the High Court
In the Amerind case, the High Court has unanimously held that the former staff of an insolvent trustee company have the same rights to priority payments as the employees of an insolvent non-trustee company. In doing so, the Court settled a long-standing debate about the nature of a trustee’s right to indemnify itself from trust property for trust […]
ReadmoreThe future of litigation in Queensland – eDiscovery and eTrials
Litigation can be costly. In particular, the discovery stage can form one of the most expensive phases of the litigation process. The Court and practitioners alike are increasingly turning to technological solutions to reduce the time and cost of the discovery process. Taking into account such factors, Gadens were recently involved in a proceeding in […]
ReadmoreWhen will a court impose a trust relationship in commercial agreements such as franchises?
In Re Stay in Bed Milk & Bread Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) ACN 115 166 982 [2019] VSC 181, the Court considered whether monies paid into a marketing fund by franchisees gave rise to a trust relationship. Background and the parties’ arguments Stay in Bed Milk & Bread Pty Ltd (the Company) was the franchisor of the […]
ReadmoreeDiscovery and eTrials in the Supreme Court of Queensland
Litigation can be costly. In particular, the discovery stage can form one of the most expensive phases of the litigation process. The Court and practitioners alike are increasingly turning to technological solutions to reduce the time and cost of the discovery process. Taking into account such factors, Gadens were recently involved in a proceeding in […]
ReadmoreJudicial review – proper, genuine and realistic consideration
A recent Federal Court decision is a timely reminder that Ministers should not rely entirely on briefing notes before making decisions – and when the decision is defended, it is the Minister who is expected to give evidence. The Federal Court recently found that a Minister had failed to “consider any comments, information or documents” […]
ReadmoreTwo for one: The Court may issue two arrest warrants for failure to attend an examination
The appeal of the decision of the Federal Court in the case of Mensink v Parbery [2018] FCAFC 101 examines the governing principles the Court considers when granting: an arrest warrant to secure appearance at an examination; and an order for contempt of court for failing to comply with an order requiring attendance for examination. […]
ReadmoreUpdate on unfair preferences and statutory set-off
One of a liquidator’s most powerful tools is the ability to seek to recover unfair preferences from creditors for the purposes of increasing the pool of assets available to creditors generally. Proceedings to recover unfair preferences can be costly and it is imperative that a liquidator assess not only the evidence available to prove the […]
Readmore
