Why leave to sue a court-appointed liquidator is unnecessary and unconstitutional

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

A ‘person aggrieved’ by any act, omission or decision of a liquidator may ‘appeal’ to a capital ‘C’ Court under s599 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the ‘Act’) in respect of the liquidator’s conduct.1 Notwithstanding, in Aardwolf Industries LLC v Tayeh [2020] NSWCA 301 (‘Aardwolf’) the owners (unsuccessfully) sought leave from the Supreme Court of New South Wales to prosecute a claim against court-appointed liquidators that ‘traverses’2 both state and federal laws and alleges the liquidators, inter alia, engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4-17
Number of pages14
JournalCommercial Law Quarterly
Volume36
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Why leave to sue a court-appointed liquidator is unnecessary and unconstitutional'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this