Restructuring & Insolvency Series

Australian Restructuring and Insolvency Guide Series – Part 3

Australian Insolvency & Restructuring Guide. Part 3: Insolvency test and filling requirements
Australian Insolvency & Restructuring Guide. Part 3: Insolvency test and filling requirements

Our ‘Australian Restructuring and Insolvency Guide’, is a practical resource when facing distressed situations, enforcement options and insolvency processes in Australia. It brings together the key legal principles and the commercial considerations that typically arise when matters move from stability to stress.

The guide is presented as a series of focused sections, each designed to stand alone as a practical reference for live matters.

While the series focuses on Australian law, it is also relevant to overseas practitioners and stakeholders dealing with Australian restructures, insolvencies, distressed investments, cross-border recovery, and creditor strategy.

Series roadmap

Across 13 parts, the series covers:

Part 1 – General

Part 8 – Security

Part 2 – Types of liquidation and restructuring processes 

Part 9 – Clawback and related-party transactions

Part 3 – Insolvency tests and filing requirements – (this article)

Part 10 – Groups of companies

Part 4 – Directors and officers

Part 11 – International cases

Part 5 – Matters arising in a liquidation or restructuring

Part 12 – Quick reference

Part 6 – Creditor remedies

Part 13 – Update and trends

Part 7 – Creditor involvement and proving claims

 

Part 3

Part 3 moves into the threshold question of insolvency. It covers the cash flow test under section 95A of the Corporations Act, how courts assess solvency in practice, and the filing considerations for directors once insolvency is suspected, including voluntary administration, insolvent trading risk, and safe harbour protection.

Insolvency tests and filling requirements
Conditions for Insolvency
  1. What is the test to determine if a debtor is insolvent?

    Section 95A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) provides that a company is solvent if it can pay all its debts as and when they become due and payable. Further, section 95A provides that a company that is not solvent is insolvent.

    The definition focuses on a “cash flow test” of insolvency, and not simply a “balance sheet test”. However, a company’s balance sheet remains relevant, because the cash flow position must be assessed by reference to the company’s financial position as a whole. Thus, insolvency is a question of fact to be ascertained from a consideration of the company’s financial position taken as a whole and taking into consideration commercial realities.

    Consistent with the definitions contained in section 95A, the Courts have held that solvency is a question of fact, assessed based on the company’s liquidity, ability to borrow, and realisability of assets (ASIC v Plymin [2003] VSC 123 [373]–[384]). While balance sheets may assist in evaluating solvency, courts have cautioned that they are not determinative.
Mandatory filing
  1. Must companies commence insolvency proceedings in particular circumstances?

    There is no statutory obligation for a company to takes steps to appoint an external administrator (i.e. commence insolvency proceedings) upon becoming insolvent. However, directors have a duty to prevent the company from incurring debts when the company is insolvent or becomes insolvent by incurring this debt, and there are reasonable grounds to suspect so, and the director is or a reasonable person in such position would be aware of such grounds. Breach of this duty may expose directors to personal liability for insolvent trading.

    To mitigate this risk, directors may appoint a voluntary administrator if they consider that the company is insolvent or likely to become insolvent. Commencing voluntary administration provides temporary protection from creditor claims in order to enable a voluntary administrator and creditors to consider the future of the Company. Directors may also access broader safe harbour protection by developing a course of action reasonably likely to lead to a better outcome than liquidation.

Next, Part 4

Part 4 turns to the personal exposure of directors and officers once insolvency risk becomes real. It covers insolvent trading, civil and criminal liability, available defences, safe harbour protection, the need to consider creditor interests as the company deteriorates, and the limits on directors’ powers once an external administrator is appointed.

If you are a director, officer, creditor or adviser dealing with a company in financial distress, the timing and evidence behind each decision matter. We can help assess exposure, preserve safe harbour options, manage continued trading risk, and respond quickly where control of the company is shifting. Our restructuring and insolvency work is designed to be commercial, evidence-disciplined, and aligned to the outcome that matters, whether that is protection, recovery, stabilisation, or an orderly external administration.

Further Information

For further information about insolvency testing in Australia, director filing considerations, insolvent trading risk, voluntary administration, and safe harbour protection, please contact the author of this article.

Picture of Trevor Withane

Trevor Withane

Trevor Withane is the Founder and Managing Partner of Ironbridge Legal. He advises clients on complex disputes, insolvency, restructuring and cross-border matters, and is recognised for his work in insolvency litigation and high-stakes commercial disputes.

Picture of Blake Shaw

Blake Shaw

Blake Shaw is a Partner at Ironbridge Legal with experience in restructuring, insolvency and commercial disputes. He advises insolvency practitioners, directors, financiers and major corporations across Australia, with a focus on practical, commercially grounded advice in complex and high-stakes matters.

Picture of Candy Lau

Candy Lau

Candy Lau is a Partner at Ironbridge Legal with over 15 years of experience in the industry across APAC. She advises clients on financial services regulatory compliance, corporate governance, privacy and the Security of Critical Infrastructure regime. Candy is recognised for her work advising global and domestic financial institutions on regulatory reform and complex remediation programs.

Further Information

For more information about the firm, contact Trevor Withane

Disclaimer

Ironbridge Legal’s communications are intended to provide commentary and general information. They should not be relied upon as legal advice. Formal legal advice should be sought in particular transactions or on matters of interest arising from this communication.