<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Corrs Chambers Westgarth - TGIF</title>
		<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/</link>
		<atom:link href="http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description>Publications from www.corrs.com.au</description>

		
		<item>
			<title>ASIC National insolvent trading program report and ASIC Duty to prevent insolvent trading: Guide for directors</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/asic-national-insolvent-trading-program-report-and-asic-duty-to-prevent-insolvent-trading-guide-for-directors/</link>
			<description>In the last six months ASIC has released the *National
insolvent trading program
report*[http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/pdflib.nsf/LookupByFileName/rep213.pdf/$file/rep213.pdf]
and the *Duty to prevent insolvent trading: Guide for
directors*[http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/pdflib.nsf/LookupByFileName/rg217-29July2010.pdf/$file/rg217-29July2010.pdf]</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/asic-national-insolvent-trading-program-report-and-asic-duty-to-prevent-insolvent-trading-guide-for-directors/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Administrators&#39; application to the court for directions</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/administrators-application-to-the-court-for-directions/</link>
			<description>In the case of Killer, in the Matter of North Coast Panels
Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2011] FCA 776,
administrators successfully sought directions from the Court
pursuant to s 447D of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
(*Act*) confirming their decision to enter into a contract
for the sale of North Coast Panels Pty Ltd (*Company*).</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/administrators-application-to-the-court-for-directions/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>An automatic right to an adjournment for new lawyers? </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/an-automatic-right-to-an-adjournment-for-new-lawyers/</link>
			<description>The courts will often grant adjournments where a litigant has engaged new lawyers. Nonetheless, the NSW Supreme Court in the case of Kingsway Group Ltd v Belramoul [2009] NSWSC 345 recently refused an application to adjourn a hearing made by a litigant who had briefed their barrister only the day before.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/an-automatic-right-to-an-adjournment-for-new-lawyers/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>An overview of the Personal Property Securities Act 2009</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/an-overview-of-the-personal-property-securities-act-2009/</link>
			<description>On 14 December 2009, the Personal Property Securities Act
2009 (the Act) together with the Personal Property
Securities (Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 received
Royal Assent. They are expected to commence in May 2011. To
date legislation for the referral of relevant powers to the
Commonwealth has been passed by four states: NSW,
Queensland, Victoria and South Australia.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/an-overview-of-the-personal-property-securities-act-2009/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Application for declarations recognising a foreign courts orders </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/application-for-declarations-recognising-a-foreign-courts-orders-/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of Re Chow Cho Poon (Private) Ltd [2011]
NSWSC 300, the Supreme Court of NSW made ex parte
declarations recognising the orders of the High Court of the
Republic of Singapore and authorising a foreign liquidator
to deal with certain property of the company located in
Australia to extent he was permitted to do so by the law of
Singapore. </description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/application-for-declarations-recognising-a-foreign-courts-orders-/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Appointment of administrators by secured creditors and directors and the subsequent application of s 447A</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/appointment-of-administrators-by-secured-creditors-and-directors-and-the-subsequent-application-of-s-447a/</link>
			<description>The recent case Re Australian Property Custodian Holdings
Ltd (Administrators Appointed) (Receivers and Managers
appointed) [2010] VSC 492 provides clarification as to the
appointment of administrators by secured creditors under s
436C of the Corporations Act 2001 (*Act*) and the
application of s 447A of the Act to validate a defective
appointment of an administrator.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/appointment-of-administrators-by-secured-creditors-and-directors-and-the-subsequent-application-of-s-447a/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Bare trustee’s entitlement to be indemnified out of trust property </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/bare-trustees-entitlement-indemnified-trust-property/</link>
			<description>Last week, we reported on the powers of bare trustees in a
winding
up.[http://www.corrs.com.au/thinking/publications/limited-powers-of-a-bare-trustee-to-deal-with-trust-assets/]
This week, we report on the recent case of Bruton Holdings
Pty Limited (In Liq) v Commissioner of Taxation [2011) FCAFC
79 in which the Full Federal Court considered whether a bare
trustee was entitled to indemnification out of trust
property for the costs of undertaking litigation in order to
protect the trust property.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/bare-trustees-entitlement-indemnified-trust-property/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Can liquidators enter into funding agreements?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/can-liquidators-enter-into-funding-agreements/</link>
			<description>In the decision of Fortress Credit Corporation (Australia)
II Pty Ltd v Fletcher [2011] FCAFC 89, the Federal Court of
Australia considered the powers of liquidators under the
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (*Act*) to enter into and
perform their obligations under funding agreements.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/can-liquidators-enter-into-funding-agreements/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Claims by shareholders in an insolvency  statutory reversal of Sons of Gwalia</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/claims-by-shareholders-in-an-insolvency-statutory-reversal-of-sons-of-gwalia/</link>
			<description>Insolvency practitioners and litigators should note the
recent amendments to section 563A of the Corporations Act.
The Corporations Amendment (Sons of Gwalia) Act 2010 (*Sons
of Gwalia Act*) came into effect on 18 December 2010,
legislating to ensure that all claims by shareholders of an
insolvent company are subordinated to those of other
creditors.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/claims-by-shareholders-in-an-insolvency-statutory-reversal-of-sons-of-gwalia/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Default notices - substantive rather than formal compliance</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/default-notices-substantive-rather-than-formal-compliance/</link>
			<description>The recent case of Perpetual Trustees Victoria Limited v
Monas [2011] NSWSC 57 confirms that a default notice served
by a creditor under section 80 of the then applicable
Consumer Credit Code (the *CCC*) is valid as long as the
notice substantively complies with the requirements of
section 80. This was despite strict compliance arguably not
having been achieved.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/default-notices-substantive-rather-than-formal-compliance/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Developer update: Changes to laws affecting off-the-plan contracts</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/developer-update-changes-to-laws-affecting-off-the-plan-contracts/</link>
			<description>We reported last year that the Victorian Parliament was
considering proposed changes to the Sale of Land Act 1962
(Vic.) (*Sale of Land Act*) concerning off-the-plan
contracts of sale as part of a second phase of reforms
flowing from the Consumer Affairs Legislation Modernisation
project. The Consumer Affairs Legislation Amendment (Reform)
Act 2010 (Vic) (*Act*) received royal assent on 28 September
2010, and the majority of the proposed changes will soon be
law.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/developer-update-changes-to-laws-affecting-off-the-plan-contracts/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Directions sought by a controller under section 424</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/directions-sought-by-a-controller-under-section-424/</link>
			<description>Last month, the Federal Court published its reasons in Re
Primebroker Securities Ltd (Receivers and Managers) (In
Liquidation) [2011] FCA 86. </description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/directions-sought-by-a-controller-under-section-424/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Director denied access to documents of company in receivership</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/director-denied-access-to-documents-of-company-in-receivership/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of Oswal v Burrup Holdings Limited [2011]
FCA 609, a director of a company in receivership was denied
access to documents relating to the potential or actual sale
of assets or shares of the company, some of which were
available to the director by other means. The director’s
application for access was made pursuant to both the
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (*Act*) and the common law.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/director-denied-access-to-documents-of-company-in-receivership/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Extensions of time limits for scheduling creditors’ meetings</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/extensions-of-time-limits-for-scheduling-creditors-meetings/</link>
			<description>In the recent Federal Court case of Duncan, in the matter of
Megafert Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2011] FCA 785
 the administrators sought to extend the time within which
to hold a second meeting of creditors on the basis that
further investigations were necessary before an accurate
report about the company could be provided. </description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/extensions-of-time-limits-for-scheduling-creditors-meetings/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Finalisation of PPS Regulations</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/finalisation-of-pps-regulations/</link>
			<description>The new Personal Property Securities Regulations 2010 (Cth)
were enacted late last month.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/finalisation-of-pps-regulations/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Limited powers of a bare trustee to deal with trust assets</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/limited-powers-of-a-bare-trustee-to-deal-with-trust-assets/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of Caterpillar Financial Australia Ltd v
Ovens Nominees Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 677, the Federal Court of
Australia considered the law relating to the duties, powers
and rights of a bare trustee in a winding up.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/limited-powers-of-a-bare-trustee-to-deal-with-trust-assets/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Limiting liability with liquidated damages clauses: J-Corp Pty Ltd v Mladenis [2009] WASCA 157</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/limiting-liability-with-liquidated-damages-clauses-jcorp-pty-ltd-v-mladenis-2009-wasca-157/</link>
			<description>Building and construction contracts often include a clause
providing for the proprietor to be paid an agreed rate of
liquidated damages in the event the contractor fails to meet
milestones by the time prescribed by the contract. To be
enforceable, the liquidated damages must represent a genuine
pre-estimate of a proprietor’s loss. Liquidated damages
clauses are normally included for the proprietor’s
benefit.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/limiting-liability-with-liquidated-damages-clauses-jcorp-pty-ltd-v-mladenis-2009-wasca-157/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Nolan revisited  the mortgagees power of sale against the mortgagors home clarified</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/nolan-revisited-the-mortgagees-power-of-sale-against-the-mortgagors-home-clarified/</link>
			<description>In 2010, we reported on Perpetual Trustee Ltd v Baranov
[2010] VSC 18, which was distinguished both at first
instance and on appeal from Nolan v MBF Investments Pty Ltd
[2009] VSC 244. In Nolan, MBF Investments appealed the
decision of Vickery J.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/nolan-revisited-the-mortgagees-power-of-sale-against-the-mortgagors-home-clarified/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Octaviar - The Queensland Court of Appeals decision affirmed in the High Court</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/octaviar-the-queensland-court-of-appeals-decision-affirmed-in-the-high-court/</link>
			<description>Earlier this week, the High Court handed down its decision
in Public Trustee of Queensland v Fortis Credit Corporation
(AUS) Pty Ltd [2010] HCA 29, unanimously upholding the
decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal and ending
confusion in relation to the circumstances that constitute a
variation to a charge.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/octaviar-the-queensland-court-of-appeals-decision-affirmed-in-the-high-court/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Pitfalls for lenders when taking personal guarantees from spouses</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/pitfalls-for-lenders-when-taking-personal-guarantees-from-spouses/</link>
			<description>The recent decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal in
Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85 is a timely reminder
to lenders when taking a personal guarantee from a
borrower’s spouse to ensure that the nature and effect of
the guarantee and the risks involved are explained to the
guarantor.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/pitfalls-for-lenders-when-taking-personal-guarantees-from-spouses/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Pre-appointment advice and the independence of administrators  when is too close for comfort?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/preappointment-advice-and-the-independence-of-administrators-when-is-too-close-for-comfort/</link>
			<description>The case of Huxtable, in the matter of Calnan Oldfield Pty
Ltd (ACN 120 195 833) (Administrator Appointed) [2010] FCA
769 outlines the issues surrounding the appointment of an
insolvency practitioner as an administrator of a company
where the practitioner previously provided advice to the
company.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/preappointment-advice-and-the-independence-of-administrators-when-is-too-close-for-comfort/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Problematic to presume: issues with reliance on the statutory presumption of insolvency</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/problematic-to-presume-issues-with-reliance-on-the-statutory-presumption-of-insolvency/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of Fisher v Divine Homes Pty Ltd; Allen v
Harb [2011] NSWSC 8, a liquidator was unable to rely on the
presumption of insolvency in 588E(4) of the Corporations Act
2001 (Cth) (the *Act*) and ultimately fail to make out a
voidable transaction claim</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/problematic-to-presume-issues-with-reliance-on-the-statutory-presumption-of-insolvency/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Recommendations of the Senate Inquiry into the Insolvency Industry</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/recommendations-of-the-senate-inquiry-into-the-insolvency-industry/</link>
			<description>This week the Australian Senate’s Economic References
Committee (*the Committee*) has tabled a report on its
inquiry into the *regulation, registration and remuneration
of insolvency practitioners in
Australia*[http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S13196.pdf].
The report recommends a number of changes for the way the
insolvency industry in Australia is regulated and
controlled.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/recommendations-of-the-senate-inquiry-into-the-insolvency-industry/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Regulatory Update: The Future of Financial Advice - Beyond Ripoll</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/regulatory-update-the-future-of-financial-advice-beyond-ripoll/</link>
			<description>The Federal Government yesterday announced its response to
the Ripoll Inquiry into Financial Products and Services in
Australia.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/regulatory-update-the-future-of-financial-advice-beyond-ripoll/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Relief against forfeiture - when is it available</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/relief-against-forfeiture-when-is-it-available/</link>
			<description>http://113.192.22.178/admin#Root_Behaviour</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/relief-against-forfeiture-when-is-it-available/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Removal of caveat lodged by registered proprietor to prevent exercise of mortgagees power of sale </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/removal-of-caveat-lodged-by-registered-proprietor-to-prevent-exercise-of-mortgagees-power-of-sale-/</link>
			<description>The recent case of Capital Finance Australia Limited v
Bayblu Holding Pty Ltd &amp; JNW Investments Pty Ltd [2011]
NSWSC 24 discusses the discretionary considerations relevant
to removing a caveat lodged by the owner of the land in an
attempt to prevent a mortgagee from exercising its power of
sale.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/removal-of-caveat-lodged-by-registered-proprietor-to-prevent-exercise-of-mortgagees-power-of-sale-/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Restrictions on enforcing guarantees provided by directors of companies in administration</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/restrictions-on-enforcing-guarantees-provided-by-directors-of-companies-in-administration/</link>
			<description>The recent Queensland Supreme Court case of Bank of Western
Australia Ltd v Clift [2010] QSC 366 indicates that the
protection provided by section 440J of the Corporations Act
to company directors, their spouses or relatives from claims
during a company administration in relation to guarantees,
may not be as absolute as previously thought.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/restrictions-on-enforcing-guarantees-provided-by-directors-of-companies-in-administration/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Roadshow Films v iiNet: ISP not liable for &#39;authorising&#39; copyright infringement</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/roadshow-films-v-iinet-isp-not-liable-for-authorising-copyright-infringement/</link>
			<description>On 4 February 2010, Justice Cowdroy delivered the Federal
Court’s decision in Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Limited
(No 3) [2010] FCA 24 (Roadshow v
iiNet[http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/24.html]).
This important case concerns the liability of an internet
service provider (*ISP*) for online copyright infringement
by its subscribers. The Court held that iiNet Limited
(*iiNet*), an ISP, was not liable for ‘authorising’ such
copyright infringement.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/roadshow-films-v-iinet-isp-not-liable-for-authorising-copyright-infringement/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Sons of Gwalia </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/sons-of-gwalia/</link>
			<description>The Sons of Gwalia case has received much publicity. Here is our brief summary of the essential issues.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/sons-of-gwalia/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>State Environmental Planning Policy (Urban Renewal) 2010</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/state-environmental-planning-policy-urban-renewal-2010/</link>
			<description>On 15 December 2010, the State Environmental Planning Policy
(Urban Renewal) 2010 (Urban Renewal SEPP) commenced. The
Urban Renewal SEPP plays an important role in implementing
the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036, which will require
70% of population growth in existing areas, necessitating
the renewal of existing urban areas.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/state-environmental-planning-policy-urban-renewal-2010/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Statutory Demands and Defects in Affidavits</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-and-defects-in-affidavits/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of CCH Workflow Solutions Pty Ltd v E
Discovery Australia Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 994 the Federal Court
considered whether the presumption of insolvency due to
non-compliance with a statutory demand arose where the
affidavit accompanying the statutory demand in question was
witnessed by a person who was not a registered Justice of
the Peace.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-and-defects-in-affidavits/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Statutory demands  the difficulty in rebutting the presumption of insolvency</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-the-difficulty-in-rebutting-the-presumption-of-insolvency/</link>
			<description>The recent case of Turco &amp; Co Pty Ltd v Pendella Holdings
Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 213 illustrates the practical
difficulties faced by a debtor company which, in order to
avoid being wound up, attempts to rebut a presumption of
insolvency as a result of failing to comply with a statutory
demand. The case highlights the importance of debtor
companies complying with, or setting aside, statutory
demands in order to avoid the presumption arising in the
first place.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-the-difficulty-in-rebutting-the-presumption-of-insolvency/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Statutory demands and offsetting claims</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-and-offsetting-claims/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of Australian Cinemas Pty Ltd v
Australian Executor Trustees Ltd [2011] FCA 927 the Federal
Court considered whether a statutory demand could be varied
due to an offsetting claim against the creditor.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-and-offsetting-claims/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Stronger Super: A New Dawn for Trustee Governance</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/stronger-super-a-new-dawn-for-trustee-governance/</link>
			<description>Michael Chaaya, Partner and member of the Corrs Financial
Services Industry Division Leadership Team, was invited to
submit a paper to the Australian Institute of Superannuation
Trustee’s inaugural Research Hub. The Research Hub
featured as part of the Conference of Major Super Funds
between 28 and 30 March 2011.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/stronger-super-a-new-dawn-for-trustee-governance/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The CAMAC report on the Sons of Gwalia decision</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-camac-report-on-the-sons-of-gwalia-decision/</link>
			<description>The High Court’s judgment in the Sons of Gwalia case has
raised significant debate amongst secured lenders, creditors
and shareholders. Here is a link to this publication’s
report on this in March 2007[[sitetree_link id=767]].</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-camac-report-on-the-sons-of-gwalia-decision/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The Centro Properties decision and directors&#39; duties in relation to accounts</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-centro-properties-decision-and-directors-duties-in-relation-to-accounts/</link>
			<description>The facts – mistakes in the accounts</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-centro-properties-decision-and-directors-duties-in-relation-to-accounts/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The High Court warns against last-ditch amendments in litigation</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-high-court-warns-against-lastditch-amendments-in-litigation/</link>
			<description>Earlier this month, the High Court in Aon Risk Services
Australia Ltd v ANU* *[2009] HCA 27 held that a party may
not be permitted to amend its case at a late stage in
litigation if that would unduly compromise the
administration of justice in the case. This decision
represents a significant shift away from the previously
understood position.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-high-court-warns-against-lastditch-amendments-in-litigation/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The Octaviar decision overturned for now</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-octaviar-decision-overturned-for-now/</link>
			<description>Last week, in Re Octaviar Ltd (No 7) [2009] QCA 282, the
Queensland Court of Appeal overturned the Octaviar trial
decision.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-octaviar-decision-overturned-for-now/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The erosion of autonomy of commercial letters of credit</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-erosion-of-autonomy-of-commercial-letters-of-credit/</link>
			<description>Commercial letters of credit are a useful tool in
facilitating international trade. Their usefulness lies in
the autonomy and the certainty which they provide to parties
to international sale of goods contracts. However, in
Australia, the autonomy and certainty of letters of credit
has been eroded by the application of sections 51AA and 51AC
of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (*TPA*).</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-erosion-of-autonomy-of-commercial-letters-of-credit/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The future of financial advice - beyond Ripoll</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-future-of-financial-advice-beyond-ripoll/</link>
			<description>An article written by Corrs partner Michael Chaaya titled
&quot;The future of financial advice - beyond Ripoll&quot; is featured
in the May edition of the Australian Superannuation Law
Bulletin.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-future-of-financial-advice-beyond-ripoll/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The importance of directors informing themselves as to their companys financial position</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-importance-of-directors-informing-themselves-as-to-their-companys-financial-position/</link>
			<description>The case of Cooper v Commissioner of Taxation [2009] NSWSC
880, is a useful illustration of the importance of directors
ensuring that their company maintains proper financial
records and that they inform themselves as to their
company’s financial position.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-importance-of-directors-informing-themselves-as-to-their-companys-financial-position/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The power of a liquidator to assign rights of a company</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-power-of-a-liquidator-to-assign-rights-of-a-company/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of Owners of Strata Plan 5290 v CGS &amp; Co
Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 168, the NSW Court of Appeal considered
whether s 477(2)(c) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the
Act) empowers liquidators to assign a right of a company to
a third party in circumstances where that right would
otherwise be unassignable.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-power-of-a-liquidator-to-assign-rights-of-a-company/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The priority of leave and superannuation entitlements falling due after commencement of receivership?  </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-priority-of-leave-and-superannuation-entitlements-falling-due-after-commencement-of-receivership-/</link>
			<description>Last month, the Federal Court published its reasons in
Vickers, in the matter of Challenge Australian Dairy Pty Ltd
(Administrators Appointed) (Receivers &amp; Managers Appointed)
[2011] FCA 10.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-priority-of-leave-and-superannuation-entitlements-falling-due-after-commencement-of-receivership-/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The ramifications of a defect in a statutory demand</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-ramifications-of-a-defect-in-a-statutory-demand/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of Sustainable Organics (Wooshaway) Pty
Ltd v Ranger Loaders Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 45, the Supreme
Court of Queensland confirmed that a defect in a statutory
demand does not necessarily prevent the a creditor from
relying on the demand to issue a winding up application.
Rather the defect must have caused substantial injustice, or
an abuse of process, in order for the demand to be
ineffective.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-ramifications-of-a-defect-in-a-statutory-demand/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Uncommercial transactions: not all about undervaluation</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/uncommercial-transactions-not-all-about-undervaluation/</link>
			<description>In the recent case of The Old Kiama Wharf Company Pty Ltd
(in liquidation) v Betohuwisa Investments Pty Limited &amp; Anor
[2011] NSWSC 823, the liquidator of The Old Kiama Wharf
Company Pty Ltd (*OKW*) sought to set aside a transaction
between OKW and Betohuwisa Investments Pty Limited
(*Betohuwisa*) on the basis that it was uncommercial under s
588FB(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/uncommercial-transactions-not-all-about-undervaluation/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Unsuccessful application by independent creditors to set aside DOCA passed by related creditors</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/unsuccessful-application-by-independent-creditors-to-set-aside-doca-passed-by-related-creditors/</link>
			<description>On 4 March 2011, the Federal Court gave judgement in the
case of Mediterranean Olives Financial Pty Ltd v Loaders
Traders Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 178.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/unsuccessful-application-by-independent-creditors-to-set-aside-doca-passed-by-related-creditors/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Update on Octaviar</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/update-on-octaviar/</link>
			<description>Previously, we have commented on the proceedings surrounding
the insolvency of Octaviar Limited (*Octaviar*).</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/update-on-octaviar/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Variation of a secured liability can require registration if contemplated by the original instrument</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/variation-of-a-secured-liability-can-require-registration-if-contemplated-by-the-original-instrument/</link>
			<description>In Re Octaviar Ltd; Re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd [2009] QSC 37, the Queensland Supreme Court considered the circumstances in which a variation to a registered charge must be notified to ASIC.
</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/variation-of-a-secured-liability-can-require-registration-if-contemplated-by-the-original-instrument/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Voidable transactions – the importance of evidence</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/voidable-transactions-importance-evidence/</link>
			<description>The recent case of Roufeil v Gliderol International Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 847 addresses voidable transactions within the meaning of s 588FE(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) and considers the element of insolvency and defences available.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/voidable-transactions-importance-evidence/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Winding up corporate trustees: liquidators entitlement to remuneration and expenses from multiple trusts</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/winding-up-corporate-trustees-liquidators-entitlement-to-remuneration-and-expenses-from-multiple-trusts/</link>
			<description>The recent case of Re Dalewon Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 311 has
served as a useful reminder of the circumstances in which a
liquidator of a corporate trustee can recover their
remuneration and expenses from trust assets. The decision
also considers what a liquidator must establish where the
liquidator is winding up a corporate trustee who administers
multiple trusts.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/winding-up-corporate-trustees-liquidators-entitlement-to-remuneration-and-expenses-from-multiple-trusts/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Will a mortgagee’s failure to register a charge within time impact a guarantor’s obligations?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/mortgagees-failure-register-charge-within-time-guarantors-obligations/</link>
			<description>In the decision of Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Anand [2011] NSWSC 613, the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered whether a mortgagee’s failure to register a charge within time, thereby rendering the charge void, would impact on a guaranto</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:19:13 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/mortgagees-failure-register-charge-within-time-guarantors-obligations/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Receivers and legal professional privilege</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/receivers-and-legal-professional-privilege/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of Carey v Korda &amp; Winterbottom [No
2] [2011] WASC 220 the Supreme Court of Western Australia
considered whether receivers were entitled to assert legal
professional privilege over documents as against a director
of the companies to which they were appointed.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:36:51 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/receivers-and-legal-professional-privilege/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Winding up application valid despite defects in service </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/winding-up-application-valid-despite-defects-in-service/</link>
			<description>The recent decision of the New South Wales Supreme Court in
the matter of Industrial Installation and Access Systems Pty
Limited [2011] NSWSC 1032 held that there was a valid
winding up application under s 459P of the Corporations Act
2001 (Cth) (*Act*) despite there being no effective service
of the originating process.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 15:32:01 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/winding-up-application-valid-despite-defects-in-service/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>When should a receivership be terminated?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/when-should-receivership-terminated/</link>
			<description>In the decision of Goldana Investments Pty Ltd (Receivers &amp; Managers appointed) v National Mutual Life Nominees Ltd &amp; Ors [2011] NSWSC 1134, the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered when a receivership should be terminated.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 23:32:26 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/when-should-receivership-terminated/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Preference payments – considering the surrounding circumstances</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/preference-payments-considering-the-surrounding-circumstances/</link>
			<description>In the case of Chicago Boot Co Pty Ltd v Davis &amp; McIntosh as
Joint &amp; Several Liquidators of Harris Scarfe Ltd [2011]
SASCFC 92, the liquidator of the Harris Scarfe Group (*HS*)
sought to set aside a series of payments made by the company
to Chicago Boot Co Pty Ltd (*CB*) on the basis that they
were voidable preference payments pursuant to s588FA of the
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).  The main issue on appeal was
whether CB had established the good faith defence under
s588FG(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), in particular,
whether CB suspected HS was insolvent at the time that the
payments were made.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:30:42 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/preference-payments-considering-the-surrounding-circumstances/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Commencing proceedings against a liquidator</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/commencing-proceedings-against-liquidator/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of Armitage v Gainsborough Properties Pty Ltd &amp; Anor [2011] VASC 419 (31 August 2011) the Supreme Court of Victoria considered whether leave from the Court was required to bring a claim against a liquidator.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:33:23 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/commencing-proceedings-against-liquidator/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Statutory demands set aside for ‘some other reason’</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-set-aside-for-some-other-reason/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of Radiomio Pty Ltd v Kendell; SISS
Business Systems Limited v Kendell [2011] VSC 511 the
Victorian Supreme Court considered when a statutory demand
will be set aside for ‘some other reason’.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:26:24 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/statutory-demands-set-aside-for-some-other-reason/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>D&amp;O Policies and litigation defence costs under threat</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/d-and-o-policies-and-litigation-defence-costs-under-threat/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of Steigrad v Bridgecorp Limited
[2011] NZHC 1037 (*Bridgecorp*) the High Court of New
Zealand held that an insured person could be prevented from
accessing funds pursuant to an insurance policy to conduct
their defence, because of the operation of a “statutory
charge” over the proceeds of the policy.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:26:59 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/d-and-o-policies-and-litigation-defence-costs-under-threat/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Landlord’s right to recover property from a company</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/landlord-s-right-to-recover-property-from-a-company/</link>
			<description>In the decision of Re Colorado Group Limited [2011] VSC 552,
the Supreme Court of Victoria considered the circumstances
in which a landlord might be granted leave under section
440C of the Corporations Act 2001 (*Act*) to recover
possession of a property from a company in administration.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:43:17 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/landlord-s-right-to-recover-property-from-a-company/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Substituted service of a creditors demand on a foreign company</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/substituted-service-creditors-demand-foreign-company/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of TPG Newbridge Myer Ltd v The
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCA 1157, the Federal
Court of Australia considered the process of serving demands
on foreign debtors under Part 5.7 of the Corporations Act
2001 (Cth) (*Act*).</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:46:37 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/substituted-service-creditors-demand-foreign-company/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Bankrupt here and bankrupt there: cross-border insolvency</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/bankrupt-here-and-bankrupt-there-cross-border-insolvency/</link>
			<description>For the first time in Australia the Court considers whether
a sequestration order should be made against a debtor
already under insolvency administration in another
jurisdiction.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 15:05:04 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/bankrupt-here-and-bankrupt-there-cross-border-insolvency/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Liquidation: when to terminate?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidation-when-to-terminate/</link>
			<description>In the case of Stolar Joinery (Aust) Pty Ltd v Charterarm
Investments Pty Ltd (in liq) [2011] VSC 577 the Supreme
Court of Victoria considered the issue of when a liquidation
may be terminated.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 14:34:26 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidation-when-to-terminate/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Unfair contracts </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/unfair-contracts/</link>
			<description>In the recent unreported decision of Fast Fix Loans Pty Ltd
v Samardzic [2011] NSWCA 260, the New South Wales Court of
Appeal upheld a determination made under the Contracts
Review Act 1980 (NSW) (*CRA*), that a deed of loan and
mortgage were unjust and unenforceable.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:48:43 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/unfair-contracts/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Priority of floating charge over a third party guarantee </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/priority-of-floating-charge-over-a-third-party-guarantee/</link>
			<description>In the recent decision of Bank of Western Australia v
National Australia Bank Ltd [2011] QSC 379, the Supreme
Court of Queensland considered whether a fixed and floating
charge over assets took priority when those assets had been
used to guarantee a third party loan from a different
lender.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:18 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/priority-of-floating-charge-over-a-third-party-guarantee/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Liquidators’ power to disclaim onerous property</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidators-power-to-disclaim-onerous-property/</link>
			<description>For the first time in Australia, the Court determines whether a liquidator is able to disclaim a contract, where the subject of that contract is the conferral of an interest in land.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:46:39 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidators-power-to-disclaim-onerous-property/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The European Court of Justice adds to the global debate on ISP liability for illegal downloading</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-european-court-of-justice-adds-to-the-global-debate-on-isp-liability-for-illegal-downloading/</link>
			<description>Late last year the European Court of Justice (*ECJ*)
delivered its eagerly awaited decision in Scarlet Extended
SA v SABAM[1]. It ruled that a Belgian court’s injunction,
requiring an Internet Service Provider (*ISP*) to install
monitoring and filtering systems aimed at preventing the
illegal downloading of files, was contrary to EU legislation
– namely, the European Directive on Electronic Commerce
(*the Directive*)[2].   </description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 15:05:09 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-european-court-of-justice-adds-to-the-global-debate-on-isp-liability-for-illegal-downloading/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The High Court cautions against refinancing a farm debt following a farm debt mediation</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-high-court-cautions-against-refinancing-a-farm-debt-following-a-farm-debt-mediation/</link>
			<description>Last week, the High Court shed some useful light on the
meaning of “farm mortgage” under the Farm Debt Mediation
Act 1994 (NSW) (*Act*) in its decision of Waller v Hargraves
Secured Investments Ltd [2012] HCA 4. </description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:06:37 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-high-court-cautions-against-refinancing-a-farm-debt-following-a-farm-debt-mediation/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The impact of bankruptcy on proceedings commenced by a person in his or her capacity as trustee </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-impact-of-bankruptcy-on-proceedings-commenced-by-a-person-in-his-or-her-capacity-as-trustee/</link>
			<description>On 2 February 2012, the Western Australian Supreme Court
gave its decision in Duckworth (as trustee for the Ocean
Farm Trust) v Water Corporation [2012] WASC 30. The question
the Court was asked to consider was whether s 60(2) of the
Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (*Act*)* *operated to stay civil
proceedings commenced by a person in their capacity as
trustee in circumstances where that person had become
bankrupt after the proceedings had been instituted.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:45:29 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/the-impact-of-bankruptcy-on-proceedings-commenced-by-a-person-in-his-or-her-capacity-as-trustee/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>How are employee entitlements to be paid when receivers and liquidators are appointed concurrently?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/how-are-employee-entitlements-to-be-paid-when-receivers-and-liquidators-are-appointed-concurrently/</link>
			<description>On 22 February 2012, the WA Supreme Court handed down its
decision in Re Great Southern Ltd (Receivers and Managers
Appointed) (in liq); Ex parte Thackray [2012] WASC 59.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:00:52 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/how-are-employee-entitlements-to-be-paid-when-receivers-and-liquidators-are-appointed-concurrently/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Unfair preference transactions and payments to the ATO</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/unfair-preference-transactions-and-payments-ato/</link>
			<description>The Federal Court's decision in Kassem and Secatore v Commissioner of Taxation [2012] FCA 152 clarifying when payments made to the Commissioner of Taxation in the six months prior to the winding up of the company will be unfair preferences.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:23:58 +1100</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/unfair-preference-transactions-and-payments-ato/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Valuing debts for the purposes of creditors’ voting powers</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/valuing-debts-for-the-purposes-of-creditors-voting-powers/</link>
			<description>“I’ve never ever, in my entire business life, seen
anything at this rate....My staff have done the calculation
and they believe [the interest was] at the rate of 142
percent per annum”.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 14:50:10 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/valuing-debts-for-the-purposes-of-creditors-voting-powers/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Liquidators and litigation funders – the production and confidentiality of documents</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidators-and-litigation-funders-the-production-and-confidentiality-of-documents/</link>
			<description>On 3 February 2012, the Federal Court of Australia delivered
its decision in the case of ABC Learning Centres Limited
(ABC), in the matter of ABC Learning Centres Limited;
application by Walker (No.11) [2012] FCA 40 in relation to
the production of documents by a banking syndicate to
liquidators and a litigation funder pursuant to public
examinations.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:51:52 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidators-and-litigation-funders-the-production-and-confidentiality-of-documents/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Public examinations conducted by receivers – constitutionally valid?</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/public-examinations-conducted-by-receivers-constitutionally-valid/</link>
			<description>The recent case of Saraceni v Jones [2012] WASCA 59 has
examined whether a court has the power under the
Constitution to order public examinations pursuant to ss
596A and 597 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (*Act*)
where a corporation is in receivership and/or its property
is in the possession of a mortgagee.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:42:46 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/public-examinations-conducted-by-receivers-constitutionally-valid/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Appointment of provisional liquidators – the need for an imminent threat to assets</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/appointment-of-provisional-liquidators-the-need-for-an-imminent-threat-to-assets/</link>
			<description>On 7 December 2011, the Supreme Court of New South Wales
(*Court*) delivered its decision in In the matter of Nugisi
Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 1512, clarifying the circumstances in
which courts will allow the appointment of a provisional
liquidator.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 14:01:44 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/appointment-of-provisional-liquidators-the-need-for-an-imminent-threat-to-assets/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>ASIC secures High Court victory against James Hardie directors</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/asic-secures-high-court-victory-against-james-hardie-directors/</link>
			<description>Yesterday the High Court of Australia delivered its decision
on an appeal brought by the Australian Securities and
Investment Commission (*ASIC*) against 7 former
non-executive directors (*Directors*) and the company
secretary and general counsel (*Mr* *Shafron*) of James
Hardie Industries Ltd (*JHIL*).  The High Court allowed the
appeal and held that the primary judge was correct in
finding that the Directors and Mr Shafron breached their
duties to JHIL in approving a misleading ASX announcement.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 15:12:29 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/asic-secures-high-court-victory-against-james-hardie-directors/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Choice Constructions Pty Ltd v Janceski [No 3] [2011] WASC 358 </title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/choice-constructions-pty-ltd-v-janceski-no-3-2011-wasc-358/</link>
			<description>Unconscionable conduct – a reminder</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 15:57:43 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/choice-constructions-pty-ltd-v-janceski-no-3-2011-wasc-358/</guid>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Liquidator’s examinations: gaining access to an affidavit in support</title>
			<link>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidator-s-examinations-gaining-access-to-an-affidavit-in-support/</link>
			<description>Under section 596B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
(*Act*), liquidators and other eligible applicants can apply
to the Court for orders to examine certain persons in
connection with the affairs of a corporation.  Under
section 596C, the affidavit in support is not available for
inspection unless a court otherwise orders.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 15:42:02 +1000</pubDate>
			
			<guid>http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/tgif/liquidator-s-examinations-gaining-access-to-an-affidavit-in-support/</guid>
		</item>
		

	</channel>
</rss>
