Reference no: EM132122135

COMPANY LAW: ASSIGNMENT QUESTION -

Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd is a company formed by two friends, Bill and Sue who met while studying computer studies at University. The company has very little assets and Bill and Sue have one share each with a paid up capital of one dollar each. Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd supplies computers and other technological products to many retail stores in Sydney.

Bill manages the business and, because he has also a Master of Accounting degree, he is put in charge of the company's book and payment of accounts. Sue, who also has a Master of Marketing degree, looks after the marketing of the business and the business customers. Sue is very happy for Bill to take care of the financial affairs of Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd, as she is always on the lookout for more stores to supply and to grow the business.

During the end of June 2018, while viewing the company's emails, Sue saw two emails from Techno Ltd (a large supplier) reminding Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd of payment of an account for in the sum of $230,000 which is now 60 days overdue. The first email was sent when the account was 30 days overdue. When Sue asked Bill about this 60 day overdue account, Bill said it was already paid and that Sue should ignore both emails.

One month later, at the end of July 2018, Sue received an angry telephone call from Techno Ltd which is now threatening to take legal action against Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd for the unpaid debt. Sue is shocked and surprised. When she confronted Bill about this overdue account (now 90 days overdue), Bill said that there must be some mistake on the part of Techno Ltd and insisted that the account was paid a month ago. Bill, in fact, had lied to Sue and did not tell her that Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd was not trading well and was struggling to pay its debts since January 2018.

In August 2018, the company received a telephone account for $1,000. Sue attempted to pay this account with the company's credit card but the payment was rejected by the bank due to insufficient funds. The bank manager told Sue that Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd had exceeded the $20,000 credit limit on its credit card. Shortly thereafter, at the end of August 2018, Techno Ltd successfully applied to court for a liquidator to be appointed to Hi Tech Supplies Pty Ltd.

(a) With reference to the relevant provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Oh), advise the liquidator whether the unpaid accounts (to the value of $251,000) can be recovered from Bill and Sue and, if so, whether the liquidator will succeed or not?

(b) ASIC, the corporate regulator is aware of the long overdue and unpaid debts of Ili Tech Supplies Pty, Ltd after receiving complaints from its creditors. If ASIC decides to enforce the relevant provision of the Corporations Act (identified in your answer in part (a) above, advise ASIC what legal remedies it may seek against Bill and Sue and its chances of success.

Textbook - Australian corporate law Textbook 6th Edition 2018 by lexisnexis.