Yesterday the Supreme Court published its long-awaited decision in the Joe & Joe Developments litigation.
The litigation has been the subject of much gossip in the industry as it concerned allegations of rampant overcharging by insolvency practitioners and their lawyers. Commentators and industry observers have been poised, salivating, waiting for the scandal to break.
In the event, as is often the case with gossip, the facts were found not to justify the hype. Continue reading
A liquidator does not always need to provide security for costs when bringing actions in the name of an insolvent company. Continue reading
In a well known 2009 decision, Hall v Poolman  NSWCA 64, a liquidator was criticised for pursuing a claim in circumstances where the entire sum recovered would be paid to the liquidator and his funder, leaving creditors without a return.
This criticism did not go unnoticed Continue reading
I’ve always wanted a motorbike, but my wife won’t let me have one.
I once asked a Harley-owning friend of mine how, during his spectacular lycra-clad roller-blading pony-tailed Harley-riding midlife crisis, he managed to get his wife to agree to his Harley. His response was to inform me that he just went out and bought it, adding – after a thoughtful pause – It’s easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Continue reading
A recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales has potentially altered the “default position” that, when a company under administration is wound up by the court, the court will appoint the liquidator nominated by the petitioning creditor, rather than the incumbent administrator. Continue reading