We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 75

Can a deed be binding without the signature of all parties?: Pratap v Permanent Custodians Limited 2013 NSWSC 1918
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • February 25 2014

This case serves as a useful reminder that once a party has signed, sealed and delivered a deed (other than a guarantee), it becomes binding on that


When will a contract by frustrated for illegality?: PT Arutmin Indonesia v PT Thiess Contractors Indonesia 2013 QSC 332
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • February 25 2014

The Supreme Court of Queensland refused to find that changes in the law which affected a company's ability to engage a contractor or changes to the


Creditors’ schemes in the hot seat: the Nine Creditors’ Scheme of Arrangement
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • February 28 2013

On 29 January 2013, the Federal Court of Australia made orders approving the creditors’ scheme of arrangement between Nine Entertainment Group Pty


Finding a ‘fraudulent and dishonest design’ for the purpose of liability of third parties who knowingly assist in a breach of fiduciary duty: Hasler v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd; Curtis v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd; Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v Almad Pty Ltd 2014 NSWCA 266
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • October 3 2014

There have been inconsistent formulations of the "dishonest and fraudulent design" element of the second limb of Barnes v Addy since the Court of


How to inadvertently resign as a director an ASIC Form 484 can be paramount: Essendon Apartment Development Pty Ltd v Shaw & Ors 2014 VSC 74
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • April 28 2014

A lack of formality in relation to a change of directorship (and associated share transfer) did not persuade the Court to invalidate the actions


When will an “in principle” settlement agreement be enforceable? Sayed v National Australia Bank Limited
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • October 24 2013

An "in principle" settlement agreement which was expressed to be "binding but subject to formal deed that will contain further terms not


Who can get damages under section 233 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)? LPD Holdings (Aust) Pty Ltd v Phillips, Hickey and Toigo & Anor
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • October 24 2013

This case illustrates that while it is open for shareholders to seek compensation for oppressive or unfair conduct under section 233 of the


When is it reasonable to withhold consent? Fulham Partners LLC v National Australia Bank Ltd
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • October 24 2013

In finding that consent to assignment was not unreasonably withheld, the New South Wales Court of Appeal noted that identity and solvency of the


Supreme Court of New South Wales considers repudiation of a loan facility and the appropriateness of advertising as a mortgagee sale in Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Geoffrey Anthony Shannon
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • September 19 2013

This case provides a useful discussion on the law of repudiation (in the context of a loan facility) and emphasises that even where there is


When will the time for payment be essential?: Liang Zhen Lin v BHW Capital Pty Ltd & Anor 2013 NSWSC 1786
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • February 25 2014

This case illustrates the willingness of the Courts to imply a term that the time for payment is essential in circumstances where the timing was