Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> Australian Regulatory Compliance Review
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
International Law
: Australian Regulatory Compliance ReviewThe role of the Federal Court in schemes of arrangement
By David Jacobson
Members? schemes of arrangement under Part 5.1 of the Corporations Act can be used in some circumstances instead of takeover bids under Chapter 6 of the Corporations Act to achieve a change of corporate control.
One of the factors to consider in choosing a change of control by way of scheme of arrangement under Section 411 of the Corporations Act is that decisions (firstly the approval of the member explanatory statement and the order for convening of a member meeting and secondly, after the members have voted, approval of the scheme itself) are at the discretion of the court.
The Chief Justice of the Federal Court has issued Practice Note CORP 3 - Schemes of Arrangement which states that when making an order under subsection 411(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 the Court will require that the explanatory statement or a document accompanying the explanatory statement, prominently display a notice that the fact that the Court has ordered that a meeting be convened and has approved the explanatory statement required to accompany the notices of the meeting does not mean that the Court:
(a) has formed any view as to the merits of the proposed scheme or as to how members/creditors should vote (on this matter members/creditors must reach their own decision); or
(b) has prepared, or is responsible for the content of, the explanatory statement.
In Seven Network Ltd, in the matter of Seven Network Ltd (No. 2) [2010] FCA 355 Justice Jacobson set out the role of the Court in reviewing scheme documents and approving the convening of scheme meetings and helpfully identified the issues the Court needs to be satisfied about before making the initial orders.
Full post as published by Australian Regulatory Compliance Review on October 11, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Federal Adoption Tax Credit
Financial Incentive for Adoptive Parents
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Taylor Bean Faces Federal WARN Class Action
Taylor Bean Federal Employment Class Action Filed
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.
National Association of Realtors
Settlement reached in broker listing antitrust lawsuit, pending court approval.
Missouri Attorney General's Office
$26,000 settlement reached in disability discrimination lawsuit, pending court approval.

Law Society appoints professional 'champions' to lead best practice panels
Freshfields to Blur the Meaning of 'Associate'
Lawsuit Claims Banks are Liable for Ponzi Schemes
Chairman Waxman Requests Details of Federal Reserves No-Bid Arrangement with BlackRock
AG Holder: Mortgage Fraud Schemes 'Despicable'







