This title is available as part of LexisLibraryFind out more or request a trial
Dibbs Barker (via linexlegal) are reporting that an Australian Insolvency Practitioner (IP) has been disciplined over his remuneration levels. The statement notes:
"The Companies Auditors and Liquidators Disciplinary Board, made a finding that Mr Gould had failed to carry out his duties as liquidator adequately and properly. This was argued to be due to a purported failure to include a 'cap' or 'upper limit' on his remuneration, in addition to a failure to refer to the company as being subject to a deed of company agreement in letters to creditors. The Board consequently suspended the registration of Gould as a liquidator for three months."
This is a particularly interesting item as it highlights the work of the Companies Auditors and Liquidators Disciplinary Board in Australia. The CALDB has the following role:
"The functions and powers of the Board in relation to an Application are performed and exercised by a Panel which conducts Hearings to determine whether a registered auditor or liquidator ("Respondent"):
The Panel, if it is satisfied that some or all of the relevant contentions in an Application have been established under the Act, may make the following orders:
The CALDB publishes its findings through press statements and judgments.
"This is the ultimate statement of where the law on IVAs is to be found in our great common law...