CORPORATIONS — application to wind up on just and equitable ground — where Defendant offered bonds and other financial products to retail clients — where ASIC has investigated Defendant’s dealings with clients and use of client funds — where sole director did not have oversight of Defendant’s business operations — where Defendant does not oppose winding up application — whether evidence establishes grounds for a lack of confidence in the conduct and management of Defendant — whether evidence establishes a risk to the public interest that warrants protection by a winding up order
Quick Take
1Evidence that a company purported to sell financial products that did not exist or in which it held no interest, provided false documents to its auditor, and diverted the vast majority of approximately $17.4 million in client funds to crypto-asset platforms and currency exchanges, established a lack of confidence in the conduct and management of the company and a risk to the public interest warranting winding up on the just and equitable ground.
2Where a company's sole director exercised no oversight of operations and neither the company nor any director opposed the winding-up application, the court cannot have confidence in the management of the company's affairs, supporting the making of a winding-up order.
3Minor non-compliance with the prescribed publication period under r 5.6(2) of the Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 1999 (NSW) may be dispensed with under s 467(3)(b) of the Corporations Act where the application is unopposed, brought by the regulator in the public interest, and no substantial disadvantage to creditors is shown.
