{"id":10422,"date":"2017-11-16T16:03:53","date_gmt":"2017-11-16T05:03:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/?p=10422"},"modified":"2017-11-16T16:03:53","modified_gmt":"2017-11-16T05:03:53","slug":"company-and-securities-law-journal-update-vol-35-pt-6","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/2017\/11\/16\/company-and-securities-law-journal-update-vol-35-pt-6\/","title":{"rendered":"Company and Securities Law Journal update: Vol 35 Pt 6"},"content":{"rendered":"

*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU. If you are using Checkpoint, the links can be found in the Checkpoint PDF <\/strong>at the bottom of this post.<\/p>\n

To purchase an article, please email:\u00c2\u00a0LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>\u00c2\u00a0or\u00c2\u00a0contact us on 1300 304 195\u00c2\u00a0(Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980\u00c2\u00a0(international customers) during business hours\u00c2\u00a0(Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AEST).<\/p>\n

The latest issue of the Company and Securities Law Journal <\/em>(Volume 35 Part 6) contains the following material:<\/p>\n

EDITORIAL<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Bob Baxt<\/em><\/p>\n

Articles<\/h3>\n

Speed in Decision-making: An Assessment of the Australian Takeovers Panel <\/strong><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c <\/em>Emma Armson<\/p>\n

Timely decision-making is an important element of an effective system of dispute resolution. The ability of tribunals to make relatively speedy decisions is accordingly a key advantage of using administrative tribunals in place of courts. This article examines the speed with which the Australian Takeovers Panel has made its decisions since it became the primary forum for resolving takeover disputes on 13 March 2000 up to 30 June 2016. The assessment is conducted based on an empirical analysis of the timing of Panel decision-making. It focuses particularly on the time taken by the Panel to make its decisions and publish the reasons for its decisions over that period.<\/p>\n

Dick Smith Inventories: The Evidence of Accounting Irregularities <\/strong><\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u201c <\/em>Jeffrey Knapp and Per Tronnes<\/p>\n

We forensically examine the accounting of Dick Smith\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s inventories over a long window ending with the corporate collapse of Dick Smith Holdings Ltd in January 2016 and beginning with historical financial information from Woolworths Ltd for fiscal year 2012. We find apparent accounting irregularities for the following: recognition of supplier rebates directly in profit, inappropriate netting of reimbursement revenues with expenses; nondisclosure of significant accounting policies, non-disclosure of expenses for net realisable value adjustments in both the statutory financial statements and the Prospectus of the Dick Smith Group; and disparities regarding both the fair values and carrying amounts of Dick Smith inventories at the date of sale by Woolworths Ltd. Our findings have a number of ramifications for current Australian accounting practice including the need for new authoritative guidance on accounting for supplier rebates.<\/p>\n

SHAREHOLDERS\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 REMEDIES<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Elizabeth Boros<\/em><\/p>\n