Anchorage Capital Master Offshore Ltd v Sparkes

(2023) 111 NSWLR 304; [2023] NSWCA 88

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Consumer Law
2. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
3. › Passing on misrepresentations
4. › Representations in drawdown and rollover notices
5. › Whether representations false at time of notices
6. › Whether employees personally liable for authorising notices
7. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 1041H, 1041I
8. › Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth), ss 12DA, 12GF
1. Contract
2. › Construction
3. › Interpretation
4. › Change in financial position
5. › Whether decrease in bid value of asset was material change in financial position
6. › Whether inception of Going Concern Note a change in financial position
7. › Whether 'financial position' limited to accounting standards
1. Corporations
2. › Insolvency
3. › Whether company insolvent
4. › Application of test under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 95A
5. › Whether practice of company regarding debt arrangements relevant
6. › Whether cyclical nature of business relevant
7. › Where negotiations occurred between borrower and lenders regarding haircut to debts
1. Corporations
2. › Voluntary administration
3. › Power to appoint administrators under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 436A
4. › Whether appointment of administrators establishes insolvency

Quick Take

Sophisticated commercial lenders do not establish a duty of care owed by borrowers in making contractual representations, and corporate officers who authorise representations on behalf of their employer are not personally liable absent a personal duty of care or actual knowledge of falsity.