Recent events, such as the Queensland Rugby Club going into liquidation and Darrell Lea entering into voluntary administration, have shown that Australian companies are not immune from the fall-out from ...
Recent events, such as the Queensland Rugby Club going into liquidation and Darrell Lea entering into voluntary administration, have shown that Australian companies are not immune from the fall-out from the difficult global economic environment.
On 3 May 2012 the High Court dismissed the appeal of Peter Shafron, the former company secretary and general counsel of James Hardie Industries Limited (JHIL) in the decision of Shafron v Australia Securities and Investments Commission [2012] HCA 18.
On 3 May 2012 the High Court held that the seven non-executive directors of James Hardie Industries Limited (JHIL) had breached their duty to exercise care and diligence, by approving the release of a misleading announcement to the ASX. This decision overturns the finding of the NSW Court of Appeal.
On 3 May 2012 the High Court concluded the James Hardie cases when it overturned the finding of the NSW Court of Appeal, and held that seven non-executive directors of James Hardie Industries Limited (JHIL) contravened their obligations under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act).
A decision of the New Zealand High Court last year cast doubt on whether directors could rely on D&O policies to fund their defence costs. It was held that civil claimants held the priority interest in Directors’ and Officers’ liability cover (D&O) under a statutory charge, and could prevent company
On 13 February 2012 the ACCC provided an update on its use of new powers to issue infringement notices to business.
The business judgment rule is a defence to breach of the statutory duty of care and diligence in section 180 of the Corporations Act. The Australian form of the rule is found in section 180(2) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and was derived from a common law doctrine of the United
On 13 October 2011, amendments were introduced to make directors personally liable for unpaid superannuation contributions where the company does not comply with its superannuation guarantee obligations.
A recent ruling in New Zealand has cast doubt on the extent to which directors can rely on their Directors’ and Officers’ (D&O) liability insurance cover to help fund defence costs. The decision is relevant to all directors of companies who have a single policy covering both defence costs and
In the recent Federal Court decision of ASIC v Healey [2011] FCA 717 Justice John Middleton ruled that Centro’s directors breached the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) when they failed to notice significant errors in the 2007 consolidated financial statements of Centro Properties Limited, Centro Property Trust and Centro Retail
On 28 June 2010 the Corporations Amendment (Corporations Reporting Reform) Act 2010 came into effect, signalling a shift from the long-standing profits-based test to a new solvency-based test for paying dividends.
It is not uncommon in shareholder disputes involving allegations of oppression under section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) for the aggrieved shareholder to seek to wind up the company as part of a wider strategy seeking a buy-out order.
Cooper Grace Ward acknowledges and pays respect to the past, present and future Traditional Custodians and Elders of this nation and the continuation of cultural, spiritual and educational practices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Fast, accurate and flexible entities including companies, self-managed superannuation funds and trusts.