Special purpose liquidators have been appointed to failed clothing retailer Mosaic Brands, after a judge found a reasonable apprehension of bias arising from liquidator Vaughan Strawbridge’s former link to Deloitte.
A judge has handed Shinetec a win in its dispute with the developer of a scuttled $185 million project in Sydney, finding that $48 million owed by the builder to its parent company after the developer called on a letter of credit fell within the definition of ‘secured money’.
A judge has hit Dyldam Developments’ former boss Sam Fayad and his two sons with costs after ordering them to pay $50 million in a case by the liquidator of a special purpose vehicle, but awarded costs to payment intermediaries for the liquidator’s “manifestly weak” case against them.
Dyldam Developments’ former boss Sam Fayad and his two sons have been ordered to pay over $50 million in a case by the liquidator of a special purpose vehicle claiming company funds were misused.
A liquidator has opened his case over the alleged misuse of funds by now defunct Dyldam Developments, as the court hears of “oddities” in financial records and the spaghetti-like structure of 157 interrelated entities.
Collapsed Sydney developer Dyldam has denied wrongdoing in a lawsuit alleging members of the Fayad family used $74 million in sale proceeds for personal benefit and sought to conceal that fact from business partners.
Collapsed Sydney developer Dyldam has told a court that a liquidator’s claim for breach of directors’ duties is “hopeless” as the company was under a deed of company arrangement at the relevant time.
The High Court has rejected a liquidator’s appeal arguing that two NSW printing press companies’ joint right to sue could be pooled to pay off debts for the entire corporate group.
The High Court has agreed to take up a case by a liquidator for two related NSW printing companies that could settle the question of whether pooling orders are available for businesses with common right to sue.
The liquidators of collapsed Sargon Capital have resolved their unfair preference case against King & Wood Mallesons over $540,000 in fees the law firm was paid for work advising the fintech before it went under.