Who is Professor Jason Harris? Professor Harris is one of the most knowledgeable insolvency researchers and academics in Australia. He is a full professor and one of the two authors of the principal textbook of Insolvency Law in Australia (Keay’s…
Sewell & Kettle were very fortunate last week to be invited by Cure Cancer and The Can Too Foundation to participate in a tour of their cancer research lab at the University of New South Wales. Sewell & Kettle is…
In article: Summary: the ROCAP targets phoenix activity Starting in 2018, there have been new reporting requirements in place for companies that are going through an ‘external administration’ process (i.e. where a receiver or liquidator has been appointed). Directors and…
Sewell & Kettle are proud to support the efforts of Cure Cancer Australia. On Friday 5 October 2018 our firm held a charity fundraiser for Cure Cancer Australia at Sokyo restaurant at the Star. Which charity was supported? All monies…
Under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) there are 4 grounds that can be relied upon in an application to set-aside a statutory demand.
Deed is a formal document that gives the clear indication that a person or entity gives its most sincere promise that they will fulfil contractual obligations.
Pursuant to section 459C(2) of the Act, an application to wind up a company in insolvency must be done within 3 months of the date that a company is presumed to be insolvent.
In this article we look at perhaps the most powerful weapon in the creditor’s arsenal: the statutory demand for payment of debt.
Receiving a Director Penalty Notice (DPN) will be a confronting experience for any company director.
Sewell & Kettle Lawyers have been added to the preferred supplier list for the US Consulate to assist US citizens and companies doing business in Australia.
Last week was a busy week for educating and meeting solicitors in Sydney and Melbourne. Lots of solicitors are interested in finding out more about the new safe harbour from insolvent trading (section 588GA Corporations Act). So the firm is…
The case of ASIC v Plymin is significant for lawyers because it sets out a list of indicators that can help us understand when a company will be found to be insolvent. The general rule in law is that company insolvency is proven by a cash-flow test not a balance sheet test.