Re Evolvebuilt Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2017] NSWSC 901
•06 July 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Re Evolvebuilt Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 901
[2017] NSWSC 901
06 July 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this case, the liquidators of Evolvebuilt Pty Ltd sought a declaration that certain payments made by a third party to a creditor of the company were invalid preferences under section 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The liquidators argued that the payments were made by the third party on behalf of the company and were therefore considered payments by the company itself. The third party, however, claimed that they had reasonable grounds to suspect that the company was insolvent, which entitled them to make the payments without them being considered preferences.
The central issue before the court was whether the payments made by the third party to the creditor constituted payments made by the company, and if so, whether the third party had a valid defence based on reasonable grounds to suspect insolvency. The court had to determine the legal principles governing when a payment by a third party could be considered a payment by the company and the defences available to the third party. Additionally, the court had to distinguish between a temporary cash flow problem and actual insolvency.
The court found that the payments made by the third party were indeed payments made by the company, as the third party had effectively acted as the company's agent in making the payments. However, the court also noted that the third party had a valid defence based on reasonable grounds to suspect insolvency. The third party had acted reasonably in suspecting insolvency and making the payments to the creditor, as the evidence showed that the company was experiencing severe financial difficulties and was unlikely to continue trading. The court held that the third party's actions were not unreasonable, and therefore the payments were not invalid preferences.
The court ordered that the liquidators' claim for invalid preferences be dismissed, as the third party had a valid defence based on reasonable grounds to suspect insolvency. The liquidators were not entitled to recover the payments made by the third party to the creditor.
The central issue before the court was whether the payments made by the third party to the creditor constituted payments made by the company, and if so, whether the third party had a valid defence based on reasonable grounds to suspect insolvency. The court had to determine the legal principles governing when a payment by a third party could be considered a payment by the company and the defences available to the third party. Additionally, the court had to distinguish between a temporary cash flow problem and actual insolvency.
The court found that the payments made by the third party were indeed payments made by the company, as the third party had effectively acted as the company's agent in making the payments. However, the court also noted that the third party had a valid defence based on reasonable grounds to suspect insolvency. The third party had acted reasonably in suspecting insolvency and making the payments to the creditor, as the evidence showed that the company was experiencing severe financial difficulties and was unlikely to continue trading. The court held that the third party's actions were not unreasonable, and therefore the payments were not invalid preferences.
The court ordered that the liquidators' claim for invalid preferences be dismissed, as the third party had a valid defence based on reasonable grounds to suspect insolvency. The liquidators were not entitled to recover the payments made by the third party to the creditor.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Insolvency Law
-
Corporate Law & Governance
Legal Concepts
-
Winding Up & Liquidation
-
Unfair Preferences
-
Reasonable Grounds to Suspect Insolvency
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Re Evolvebuilt Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 901
Most Recent Citation
BounceLED Pty Ltd v Clear Skies Corp Pty Ltd (in liq) [2023] NSWSC 121
Cases Citing This Decision
22
Hosking v Extend N Build Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2020] NSWCA 107
Hosking v Extend N Build Pty Ltd
[2018] NSWCA 149
BounceLED Pty Ltd v Clear Skies Corp Pty Ltd (in liq)
[2023] NSWSC 121
Cases Cited
23
Statutory Material Cited
1
Burness v Supaproducts Pty Ltd
[2009] FCA 893
Commissioner of Taxation v Kassem
[2012] FCAFC 124