Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Receivership and Voluntary Administration- Impact and Interaction. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 22 page paper discusses the insolvency rules in Australia which allow a firm to be in voluntary administration and receivership at the same time. The paper assesses these two insolvency practices; looking at what they are and when they are used as well as the advantages and disadvantages associated with each approach. The way in which they may interact is also discussed. The bibliography cites 16 sources.
Page Count:
22 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS65_TEAUvoladmin.doc
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
recent years, with the aim of increasing the potential for firms to recovery or to be rescued following a period of insolvency. Following legislative changes in 1992 there is the
potential for an organisation to undertake voluntary administration, providing them with an opportunity to recover and protecting them from creditors. However, despite the introduction of voluntary administration, it is notable
that many companies still end up in receivership. While many studies have been undertaken to examine the impact of voluntary administration, arguing that it was needed in order to bring
Australian insolvency law up-to-date and allow firms the opportunity to recover, there has been little research concerning companies where there is a combination of both a voluntary administration and the
presence of receivership. The aim of this research is to examine this phenomena, in order to identify how and why this occurs, and examine the potential interaction of these two
insolvency tools. Each of the insolvency tools will be discussed separately, looking at their role as well as considering the way in which they are applied, discussing their use including
a critical analysis and evaluation, provided as each individual tool is discussed. 1.1 Background to the Research It was generally recognised that Australian insolvency law required updating, in order to
avoid position where a firm that faced insolvency was not given a suitable opportunity for recovery. The need for this approach had been recognised for a number of years prior
to the reform; as seen with the Harmer Report 198812. Prior to reform the insolvent firm would have two options; receivership or liquidation; with the focus placed in the protection
of the creditors interests rather than the survival of the firm, where other stakeholders such as employees may be impacted3. It was noted by Korokbin that when a firm became
...