Stay up to date and receive our latest insights directly to your inboxSubscribe Now

Filter by

Blatant illegal phoenixing stamped out in a first for the new Anti-phoenixing Laws

The Supreme Court of Victoria recently handed down a decision in Re Intellicomms Pty Ltd (in liq)[2022] VSC 228 (Intellicomms), in what is a first for anti-phoenixing jurisprudence in Australia. The decision made findings in relation to the creditor defeating disposition provisions in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act), which were introduced relatively recently by way of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Combating Illegal Phoenixing) Act 2019 (Cth) (Phoenixing Act). The decision in Intellicomms was the first of its kind to utilise the creditor defeating disposition amendments in the Act to hold that a transaction was a creditor defeating disposition, pursuant to section 588FDB of the Act and voidable under section 588FE(6B) of the Act. This is the first example of the new provisions combatting illegal phoenixing as was intended by the legislature.

The Personal Injury Commission refuses an application for reconsideration

In the recent case of Gusavac v GPC Asia Pty Ltd [2022] NSWPIC 123, Member Michael Perry of the Personal Injury Commission (PIC) held that the reconsideration application (RA) to set aside the Certificate of Determination be declined and the application to refer the matter back to the Medical Assessor (MA) for reconsideration under section 329 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 be refused. 

Personal Injury Commission’s Medical Assessors have no power to determine a claim for medical expenses not incurred and not provided.

Obeid v AAI Ltd t/as AAMI [2022] NSWPICMP 76 This case looked at whether the Personal Injury Commission’s Medical Assessors had power to determine a claim for medical expenses not incurred and not provided.  

London Calling: The Clash of Smart Legal Contracts?

Distributed ledger technology such as blockchain is driving increasing innovation to disrupt established markets in new ways of transacting. Legally binding smart legal contracts (SLCs) executed without human intervention are spawning investment in new areas ranging from insurance, finance, real estate and supply chains. In November 2021, the UK Law Commission presented advice to the UK Parliament on how existing laws can accommodate SLCs. The report provides useful insights into gaps and considerations in Australia. Their conclusion is that the current legal framework can support SLCs.

What Counts As "Obvious Risk"?- Part 2

Two recent matters concerning the dangerous recreational activity (DRA) defence provide the insurance industry with parameters concerning the extent to which the DRA defence is available to insurers where obvious risks are involved.  

What Counts As "Obvious Risk"? - Part 1

2021 was a precedent-setting year for litigation relating to dangerous recreational activities (DRAs) and the engagement of the dangerous recreational activity defence under section 5L of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW).

Everyone’s Had It… So, What’s Reasonable Now?

Even before March 2020, before COVID Omicron, the RAT’s and the lockdowns, knowing what ‘normal’ was meant to look like was always a challenge. For employers and their advisors, we relied on the laws and decisions of the Tribunals and Courts to provide direction about what could (or should) be done (or not done).

Electronic execution now permanent for Australian companies

Changes to the Corporations Act for COVID-19 that allowed virtual company meetings and electronic execution of company documents have been made permanent. These changes mean that companies no longer have to fear a return to doing everything in hard copy and in person. 

How to protect yourself against Construction Company insolvencies.

Entering into a contract to build a new home for a fixed price would seem, at least on the surface, to be the easiest and most stress-free way to get yourself a brand-new home...  

Recent developments to mandatory examinations: Things you should know.

Under section 596A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), an eligible applicant can apply to the Court and the Court can, in turn, summon an officer of a company under external administration for examination about the company’s affairs.

Members of the Personal Injury Commission are not bound by the rules of evidence, but they may be guided by it.

Mrs Nasr, the claimant, was injured in a car park, when Mr Fawcett (QBE’s Insured driver) collided with the left-hand side of her vehicle. The claimant then lost control of her vehicle, driving through a fence before colliding with a tree. 

Conflicting medical evidence? Why a clear diagnosis of consequential worker injury is essential.

In the recent case of Grant v Dateline Imports Pty Ltd [2022] NSWPICPD 3, the President of the Personal Injury Commission (PIC) confirmed that a clear diagnosis supporting an alleged consequential condition would aid in discharging the worker’s onus of proving an entitlement to lump sum benefits pursuant to s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act).

Set-off shield to unfair preference claims dropped

Last Thursday (16 December 2021), in the decision of Morton as Liquidator of MJ Woodman Electrical Contractors Pty Ltd v Metal Manufacturers Pty Limited [2021] FCAFC 228 (MJ Woodman), the Full Court of the Federal Court delivered a highly anticipated decision surrounding section 553C of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) and a liquidator’s unfair preference claim.

Hicksons Special Counsel, Roslyn Pavey, article featured in SMSF Adviser

When you pass away, it is important to ensure your loved ones are not left with a financial and legal headache.

Commission muddies the water on whether working from home is a benefit for employees

Since the outbreak of COVID-19 in Australia in March 2020, there has been significant shifts towards working from home across multiple industries. The NSW Personal Injury Commission has now considered in what circumstances being refused the opportunity to work from home may amount to the withdrawal of an employment benefit or transfer, namely for the purpose of a section 11A defence to a psychological injury condition.

Subscribe to Our Blog

Keeping you connected, Hicksons regularly publishes articles to keep you up to date on the latest developments. To receive these updates via email, please subscribe below and indicate which areas of law you would like to receive information on.