In Brief

Changes to the way most cor­po­rate insol­ven­cy notices have to be pub­lished came into effect on 1 July 2012. The Supreme Court of New South Wales has pro­vid­ed some guid­ance about how par­ties can avoid the cost of hav­ing to pub­lish notice of any appli­ca­tion to wind up a com­pa­ny on both the new ASIC web­site and in the print media


Changes requir­ing most cor­po­rate insol­ven­cy notices to be pub­lished on a new web­site run by the Aus­tralian Secu­ri­ties and Invest­ments Com­mis­sion (ASIC) came into effect on 1 July 2012.

Details of the changes are dis­cussed in our recent arti­cle.

As dis­cussed in our pre­vi­ous arti­cle, the intro­duc­tion of the new web­site pub­li­ca­tion require­ments has not for­mal­ly altered the require­ment under Fed­er­al Court and Supreme Court Rules, requir­ing print media pub­li­ca­tion of notices of wind­ing up appli­ca­tions. This rais­es the issue of dupli­ca­tion of costs for pub­li­ca­tion of wind­ing up notices as they would need to be pub­lished both on the web­site in return for pay­ment of a fee and in the print media.

To address this issue, the Reg­istry of the Supreme Court of New South Wales has indi­cat­ed that, sub­ject to any future deter­mi­na­tion of the issue by the Court, notice of a wind­ing up appli­ca­tion does not need to be pub­lished in a dai­ly news­pa­per, pro­vid­ed that any wind­ing up appli­ca­tion filed with the Supreme Court is sup­port­ed by an affi­davit that proves that notice of the appli­ca­tion has been pub­lished on the ASIC web­site and requests that the require­ments of Rule 5.6 of the Supreme Court (Cor­po­ra­tions) Rules 1999 (NSW) be dis­pensed with.

The issue is like­ly to be clar­i­fied fur­ther in due course through deter­mi­na­tion by the Court and leg­isla­tive amend­ments to the Fed­er­al Court and Supreme Court Rules.

If you would like fur­ther infor­ma­tion or have any spe­cif­ic ques­tions about the changes, please con­tact us.

If you would like to repub­lish this arti­cle, it is gen­er­al­ly approved, but pri­or to doing so please con­tact the Mar­ket­ing team at marketing@​swaab.​com.​au. This arti­cle is not legal advice and the views and com­ments are of a gen­er­al nature only. This arti­cle is not to be relied upon in sub­sti­tu­tion for detailed legal advice.

Publications

10 year long stop on build­ing defect claims rein­forced for con­tri­bu­tion claims

The recent deci­sion in For­tius Broad­way No 1 Pty Ltd V ACN 103 211 141 Pty Ltd (for­mer­ly known as Wat­pac Con­struc­tion…

A High­er Evi­den­tiary Bur­den for Work Orders: The Prac­ti­cal Impli­ca­tions of The Own­ers – Stra­ta Plan No 102171 v Ceerose Pty Ltd [2025] NSW­CATCD 137

The deci­sion in The Own­ers – Stra­ta Plan No 102171 v Ceerose Pty Ltd; Zone Q Mil­sons Point Devel­op­ment Pty Ltd v Ceerose…

Impor­tant Work­place Rela­tions Changes Effec­tive 1 July 2026

Employ­ers and employ­ees alike should be aware of impor­tant changes in the work­place rela­tions are­na, effec­tive 1 July 2026. From that date:the…

In the News

Roger Corn­forth Retires Fol­low­ing 45 Years of Dis­tin­guished Legal Practice

Roger’s career has been defined by trust­ed rela­tion­ships, prac­ti­cal advice and an unwa­ver­ing com­mit­ment to his clients. Begin­ning his legal…

Protest group los­es appeal to obtain gov­ern­ment documents

The cas­es — Mudgee Region Health Alliance v Min­is­ter for Finance, Domes­tic Man­u­fac­tur­ing and Gov­ern­ment Pro­cure­ment and Nat­ur­al Resources [2026] NSW­CATAD…

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, The PM v work­place stan­dards”, pub­lished in HR Leader on 8 July 2026

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“The PM v work­place stan­dards”, pub­lished in HR Leader on 8 July 2026To read the…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information