Australia: A change in the Australian restructuring landscape.

Australia's restructuring landscape has changed significantly in recent weeks on two fronts. One of the changes arises from the safe harbour and ipso facto reforms to Australia's insolvency laws receiving royal assent on 18 September 2017. The second event arose rather more unexpectedly from the Federal Court decision of Re Korda, in the matter of Ten Network Holdings Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed)(Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2017] FCA 914 (Ten Decision).

We discussed the detail of the proposed law reforms in our article ' Any Port in a Storm? Analysing Safe Harbour and Ipso Facto Insolvency Reforms'. Following royal assent, Australian insolvency law now has:

  • a 'safe harbour' for directors who are seeking to develop or implement a restructuring of a company which shields them from personal liability for insolvent trading under section 588G of the Corporations Act 2001; and
  • a stay on enforcement of 'ipso facto' clauses in a contract entered into after 1 July 2018 that are triggered when a company enters formal insolvency proceedings.

The 'safe harbour' reform takes immediate effect from 18 September 2017 and the 'ipso facto' reform will take effect from 1 July 2018 (or earlier by proclamation).

The safe harbour reform clears the way for a company or board operating in the twilight zone of insolvency to take steps for early intervention and to seek out the advice of restructuring professionals to put in place a restructuring plan. There is now no excuse for a board to sit on their hands and wait for a third party to determine their fate. Central to any restructuring plan is engaging appropriately qualified advisors who can assist in putting together a plan. These advisors can also do contingency planning which involves analysis of the impact of a free fall insolvency and the possible advantages of using a light touch insolvency process to implement the restructuring. In its submissions to the court in the Ten Decision, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) noted that "directors contemplating potential insolvency should be encouraged to do the very thing that the Ten Group did, namely engage with qualified professionals early, to develop a restructuring plan that will increase the chances of rescue or maximise the amount that can be salvaged for the benefit of creditors and, if at all possible, members."1

By engaging early and preparing for the worse, a company has a greater chance of rescue but up until now, Australian insolvency law and practice has stymied directors from engaging early and largely prevented insolvency and restructuring professionals from being engaged early. The insolvency law reforms and the Ten Decision pave the way for a change in this approach.

When considered together with the insolvency law reforms, the Ten Decision is important for a number of reasons. First, it tips on its head the industry's traditional (and at times conservative) approach to conflicts of interest and independence of insolvency practitioners. Secondly, it reminds us of the court's ability to appoint a special purpose administrator in appropriate circumstances under section 447A of the Corporations Act 2001 where there may be a perceived or actual conflict of interest. Finally, the decision may lead to an increase in the use of "planned" insolvencies as a restructuring tool in Australia (as opposed to traditional pre-packs).

CONFLICT AND INDEPENDENCE

It is central to the operation of Australia's insolvency laws that administrators and liquidators act independently and impartially. They should take all necessary steps to avoid or appropriately manage conflicts of interest and circumstances which may give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. In this pursuit of independence and impartiality, insolvency practitioners in Australia have typically been reluctant to accept administration appointments in circumstances where he or she has had prior, substantial involvement with the company.

What constitutes substantial involvement has typically involved a case-by-case self-assessment by the practitioner prior to any need for intervention by the court and has largely been centred on a consideration of the time spent working with the company, the work performed and the fees charged during the pre-appointment period.

It wouldn't be controversial to suggest that a pre-appointment engagement of over three months involving approximately 50 meetings with management, directors, financiers, guarantors and advisors which resulted in the payment of over $1,000,000 in remuneration is likely to constitute "substantial involvement". However, it is clear from the reasoning in the Ten Decision that:

  • the starting point for making an assessment does not have to be that prior, substantial involvement of itself causes a reasonable apprehension of bias;
  • it is now open to the practitioner to consider the benefits to the company, its creditors (and possibly members) of this prior, substantial involvement; and
  • provided certain safeguards are in place to protect against any apprehension of bias or conflict of interest, a practitioner should not automatically rule themselves out from taking a subsequent appointment solely on the basis of their prior involvement with the company even if that engagement involved a significant amount of work at a substantial cost to the organisation.

In addition to the use of special purpose administrators (discussed below), one of the other safeguards raised in the judgment centred on the disclosures contained in the administrator's Declaration of Independence, Relevant Relationships and Indemnities (DIRRI) required under section 436DA of the Corporations Act (Act). ASIC submitted, and the Court agreed, that had KordaMentha fully disclosed the extensive nature and detail of the pre-administration work with the Ten Group in its DIRRI that the angst around their appointment as administrators in light of this pre-appointment involvement may have largely been avoided.

Previously, administrators may have been reluctant to disclose too much detail on prospective administration planning in the DIRRI for fear of placing directors of that company in the direct firing line under Australia's insolvent trading laws or exposing their own firm to a potential voidable transaction claim. It is likely that these concerns are largely addressed if a company is operating in a safe harbour.

SPECIAL PURPOSE ADMINISTRATORS

The Ten Decision is also a timely reminder that the courts have the power under section 447A of the Corporations Act to appoint a special purpose administrator in circumstances where there may be a perceived or actual conflict of interest but where there is an ultimate benefit to creditors from a time and cost perspective to leave the incumbent administrator in place.

As the court noted in the decision of Hughes v Westgem Investments Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (No 3) [2012] WASC 360:

  • the decision to appoint a special purpose administrator must be made on a case by case basis;
  • special purpose administrators can be appointed to deal with perceived conflicts of interest and if necessary to cure actual conflicts; and
  • an administrator's prior involvement with a company will not of itself create a conflict of interest if that administrator is then appointed to the company. However, substantial involvement with the company may give rise to a conflict of interest

Although appointments of this nature have been rare in Australia, with the introduction of the safe harbour reform, it is more likely that insolvency practitioners will have a greater involvement for a longer lead time in companies trading in the twilight zone which may give rise to perceived or actual conflicts which could be proactively managed by the limited appointment by the court of a special purpose administrator.

The Ten Decision is a good example of where the court has used these powers to cure, what was considered to be, a reasonable apprehension of bias arising from the payments made to KordaMentha during the pre-appointment period.

Insolvency practitioners are urged to get on the front foot and seek judicial direction early if there is any doubt.

PRE-PACKED TRANSACTIONS AND PLANNED INSOLVENCIES

There is a distinction to be drawn between a typical pre-pack transaction and a planned insolvency where the parties use a formal insolvency method to implement a broader restructuring in circumstances where a fully consensual restructuring is unable to be achieved. The formal insolvency process is used to cram down dissenting creditors to deliver the restructuring. This technique is commonly used in the United Kingdom (along with traditional pre-packs) where achieving a fully consensual restructuring is not possible. In these circumstances, the pre-insolvency planning is critical to working up any non-consensual Plan B strategy.

In our view, the Ten Decision opens the door to an increased use of the planned insolvency process. The pre-appointment planning undertaken by the Ten Group with the assistance of KordaMentha, their consequent appointment as voluntary administrators and the acquisition by CBS of the Ten Group by way of a deed of company arrangement is a classic example of how a planned insolvency can work successfully in the Australian market to maximise value and create certainty.

In contrast, a pre-pack is considered to be a sale of all or some of a company's assets which is arranged prior to, and completed shortly after, a formal insolvency appointment. In most instances, it is completed without any approval or involvement of the creditors and the counter-party to the pre-pack transaction is known at the time of the formal insolvency. Historically, the use of pre-pack transactions in Australia has been limited. Most commentators agree that the key impediments to their use in Australia have been largely due to:

  • Restrictions on insolvency practitioners regarding independence, conflicts of interest and involvement with the company pre-appointment;
  • Australia's draconian insolvent trading laws;
  • The prevalence of ipso facto clauses which enable counterparties to terminate key contracts on the appointment of an administrator.

Although the insolvency law reforms are likely to address issues around insolvent trading and ipso facto clauses, the restrictions on insolvency practitioners regarding independence and conflicts of interest are likely to remain. Whether we see an increase in pre-pack transactions in Australia where an alternate insolvency practitioner is used to take the appointment (as opposed to the pre-appointment advisor taking the ultimate appointment) remains to be seen.

There is a lengthy discussion in the Ten Decision about pre-packs, however there is nothing in the judgment which would appear to support the lifting of the restrictions on insolvency practitioners regarding independence, conflicts of interest and involvement with the company pre-appointment to facilitate an increased use of traditional pre-packs in Australia. In fact, His Honour Justice O'Callaghan was quick to draw this distinction in his judgment in the Ten Decision. He noted that it would be difficult to imagine a situation in which the taking of a pre-pack administration appointment in circumstances where the practitioner has had detailed involvement and assistance with the pre-pack proposal would ever be countenanced.

The insolvency law reforms and the practical approach adopted by the court in the Ten Decision to independence and conflicts of interest are a step in the right direction and hopefully, a significant move towards companies in Australia being more comfortable with exploring informal, consensual restructuring options with the help of experienced advisors.

Footnotes

1 Re Korda, in the matter of Ten Network Holdings Ltd (Administrators Appointed)(Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2017] FCA 914 at paragraph 61

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Chambers Asia Pacific Awards 2016 Winner – Australia
Client Service Award
Employer of Choice for Gender Equality (WGEA)

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions