{"id":788,"date":"2010-10-06T04:50:29","date_gmt":"2010-10-06T04:50:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/wp3.thomsonreuters.net.au\/journals\/?p=788"},"modified":"2010-10-06T04:50:29","modified_gmt":"2010-10-06T04:50:29","slug":"insolvent-trading-defences-after-hall-v-poolman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/2010\/10\/06\/insolvent-trading-defences-after-hall-v-poolman\/","title":{"rendered":"Insolvent trading defences after Hall v Poolman"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><em>By Patrick J Lewis*<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The decision in <em>Hall v Poolman<\/em> (2007)\u00e2\u20ac\u2030215 FLR 243; 65 ACSR 123 examined liability for decisions made by experienced businesspeople years earlier in times of financial hardship. Palmer\u00c2\u00a0J exercised his discretion under s\u00c2\u00a01318 to relieve the director from liability for insolvent trading. However, he narrowed the review of &#8220;all the circumstances&#8221; to whether the action was commercially reasonable. Directors must be able to make decisions, which inevitably involve some degree of commercial risk, if the economy is to be advanced. The currently available defences to the duty to prevent insolvent trading in ss\u00c2\u00a0588H and 1318 are both underutilised and rarely successful. A more general defence should be introduced to allow directors greater flexibility in attempting informal work-outs of distressed companies.<\/p>\n<p>The full article can be accessed here: &#8220;Insolvent trading defences after Hall v Poolman&#8221; <a href=\"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2010\/10\/j04_v028_CSLJ_pt06_lewis.pdf\">(2010) 28 C&amp;SLJ 396<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>* LLB (Hons I) (University of Sydney).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By Patrick J Lewis. The decision in Hall v Poolman examined liability for decisions made in times of financial hardship. In the wake of the global financial crisis, directors and executives have to meet numerous challenges which were not present when the insolvent trading provisions were last the subject of debate.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[260],"tags":[259,18,28,265,29],"class_list":["post-788","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-company-and-securities-law-journal","tag-cslj","tag-corporations-act","tag-directors-liability","tag-hall-v-poolman","tag-insolvent-trading"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/788","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=788"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/788\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=788"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=788"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=788"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}