Can a “Gentleman’s Agreement” not to enforce a guarantee be relied upon?

In Harburg Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor v Deen,[1] the Supreme Court of Queensland considered whether an oral “gentleman’s agreement”, that is the oral representations made, meant that the guarantees were unenforceable. The facts As at May 2015, Harburg Nominees Pty Ltd (Harburg) had, over time, advanced approximately $18.5 million to Warapar Resources Pty Ltd (Warapar) for […]

Readmore

“Legal Phoenix” – The burdens and benefits of professional advice

In ACN 093 117 232 Pty Ltd (In Liq) v Intelara Engineering Consultants Pty Ltd (In Liq) [2019] FCA 1489, the court considered whether a “legal phoenix” arrangement entered into after receiving professional advice was in fact a voidable transaction. The facts Intelara Pty Ltd (OldCo) operated an engineering consultancy business and after experiencing financial difficulties in […]

Readmore

Gadens Connect | 2020 Edition Two

Welcome to the second edition of Gadens Connect, and our first quarter update of 2020. This year has seen many challenges for lenders, from bushfires to the more recent COVID-19 pandemic. We know you have been working hard to support thousands of affected customers and we are here to work with you, and support your […]

Readmore

COVID-19 | Verification of identity – the need to go digital

All of the states (but not the territories) require mortgagees to undertake reasonable steps to verify the identities of mortgagors, commonly through a framework called the “Verification of Identity Standard” (VOI Standard) undertaken by specialised “Identity Agents” e.g. lawyers or other agents with professional indemnity insurance. Where they do not, and the mortgage instrument is […]

Readmore

Responding to a subpoena – is it always necessary to lay everything bare?

In Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Tiller,[1] the Federal Court of Australia was tasked with considering the grounds on which a subpoena to produce may be set aside.  Interestingly, the subpoenas in question were made for third parties (which were related to the respondents) to produce financial records and other documents to the Court in the context […]

Readmore

Gadens Connect | 2020 Edition One

Welcome to Gadens Connect – a newsletter to share insights, trends and opportunities for our clients in the financial services industry. In this edition we share some key performance insights from 2019 and provide an overview of topics including updates to our GPSR platform (automation and integration solutions), MIP sale obligations and updates to the […]

Readmore

Responsible lending – updated guidance and practical considerations

Lenders’ responsible lending obligations have been a fluid topic in the wake of the Hayne Royal Commission’s final report in February 2019. In that report, Commissioner Hayne said that he was ultimately not persuaded that the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth) (NCCP) needed to change in that aspect. His view was that the […]

Readmore

Mortgagees and verifying mortgagors’ identities – a time of change

On 18 December 2019, the Australian Registrars National Electronic Conveyancing Council (ARNECC) released a consultation draft of version 6 of its Model Participation Rules. It pertains to Mortgagees’ “Verification of Identity” (VOI Draft) requirements when registering mortgage securities, which are separate to AML / CTF KYC requirements. The VOI Draft – which contains one very […]

Readmore

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 […]

Readmore

Service 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 […]

Readmore

Freezing and ancillary orders – key factors the Court considers

Following our July 2018 refresher article ‘Freezing orders – a refresher’, the recent decision of Parbery & Ors v QNI Metals Pty Ltd & Ors [2018] QSC 107 is a helpful reminder of the factors the Court will take into account and the threshold an applicant must meet when deciding whether to grant freezing and […]

Readmore

Let the Court decide – administrator and equitable liens

In White, in the matter of Mossgreen Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) v Robertson,[1] the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia considered whether administrators were entitled to an equitable lien over property owned by a company or a third party to recover fees and costs incurred in an administration. This arose in circumstances where […]

Readmore