The Court refused to adjourn winding up proceedings under s 440A(2) of the Corporations Act, finding the administrator had not discharged the onus of demonstrating that continued administration was in creditors' interests. The proposed deed of company arrangement, which depended on the company trading profitably over two years to fund a 20-24 cents in the dollar return, was held to be too contingent, optimistic and unrealistic on the evidence, particularly given the company's history of unprofitable trading, the absence of any external cash contribution, the director's increased drawings, and the lack of explanation for projected revenue substantially exceeding recent actual performance. The company was then wound up on the basis of the unrebutted presumption of insolvency arising from non-compliance with a statutory demand.
The full text is available to signed-in members.