*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 at the bottom of this post.<\/p>\n
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 9171 7100 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).<\/p>\n
The latest issue of the Insolvency Law Journal<\/em> (Volume 32 Part 2) contains the following material:<\/p>\n EDITORIAL<\/a> \u2013 Editor: Dr David Morrison <\/em><\/p>\n The Adjudication of Proofs of Debt in Liquidation: On Power and History <\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u2013 Nikita Angelakis<\/p>\n The High Court has held that when adjudicating proofs of debt, a liquidator acts quasi-judicially \u201caccording to the standards no less than the standards of a court or judge\u201d. The first article in this series considered the potential impact and misconceptions that follow from this characterisation of a liquidator\u2019s function, including whether it suggests the liquidator\u2019s power is in fact a judicial power. The second article in this series examines the effect of a liquidator\u2019s adjudication on a creditor\u2019s rights, and whether such an adjudication might be immune from collateral attack by creditors and others in proceedings before a court. It then turns to the history of the procedure and the course by which it originated as a function of a court and was later referred to the liquidator. The last article in this series will consider the limitations on the powers and obligations of liquidators.<\/p>\n All at Sea: Safe Harbour\u2019s Failure to Protect Stakeholders against Insolvency <\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u2013 Luke Byrnes<\/p>\n Australia\u2019s insolvency law regime provides a critical means of ensuring that the engines of Australia\u2019s economy remain humming. However, Australia\u2019s insolvency regime has recently aimed to tackle the tension between entrepreneurialism and creditor protection by introducing s 588GA of the Corporations Act 2001 <\/em>(Cth) as a \u201csafe harbour\u201d carve out to the director\u2019s duty to prevent insolvent trading. A closer examination of the 2023 \u201cCorporate Insolvency in Australia\u201d report by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services and 2022 \u201cReview of the Insolvent Trading Safe Harbour\u201d, suggests some concerns as to whether the practical implications of s 588GA are meeting its policy justifications. This article considers four key criticisms borne out of the 2023 Corporate Insolvency Report and makes four recommendations for policy reform.<\/p>\n THE SOLICITOR\u2019S EQUITABLE LIEN: AN UPDATE<\/p>\n INTERNATIONAL NOTES \u2013 Editor: Dr David Morrison<\/em><\/p>\n NEW ZEALAND REPORT \u2013 Editor: Professor Lynne Taylor<\/em><\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW \u2013 Editor: Dr David Morrison<\/em><\/p>\n For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: New Westlaw Australia – Insolv LJ Vol 32 No 2 Contents<\/a>\u00a0or here: Checkpoint – Insolv LJ Vol 32 No 2 Contents<\/a>.<\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on New Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\nArticles<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n