Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 AUGUST 2023

Circulating assets come and go, security remains resilient

Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Contributor
Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Corrs Chambers Westgarth is Australia’s leading independent law firm. We provide exceptional legal...

View firm profile
Explore more from Corrs Chambers Westgarth

The characterisation of amounts owing to a company as 'circulating assets' is crucial in predicting priority disputes.

AustraliaInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring

When do amounts owed to a company constitute 'circulating assets' and how should they be distributed? This crucial question has not always been answered predictably in recent cases. The Court of Appeal's decision in Resilient Investment Group Pty Ltd v Barnet and Hodgkinson as liquidators of Spitfire Corporation Limited (in liq) [2023] NSWCA 118 has provided a framework for navigating the relevant principles in the context of a priority dispute over R&D tax refunds.

Key takeaways

  • The characterisation of amounts owing to a company as 'circulating assets' remains crucial in predicting the outcome of priority disputes. While this case found in favour of the secured lender, lenders taking security should take care to understand whether they are taking security over circulating assets.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

    Lawyers Weekly Law firm of the year 2021                  
Employer of Choice for Gender Equality (WGEA)

See more popular content from