澳大利亚公司法
澳大利亚破产制度的立法模式
澳大利亚破产制度的立法模式
澳大利亚的破产制度是通过《破产法》（Bankruptcy Act）来进行规范的。
澳大利亚的破产法体系主要包括两个方面：个人破产和公司破产。
个人破产：
1.《破产法》：个人破产主要由《破产法》来规范。
这个法律涵
盖了个人破产的程序、法律责任、债务清偿等方面。
2.破产法庭：澳大利亚设有专门的破产法庭，负责处理个人破产
案件。
法庭根据《破产法》的规定进行判决和裁定。
公司破产：
1.《公司法》（Corporations Act）：公司破产主要受《公司
法》的规范。
这个法律是澳大利亚公司法的主要法规，包括了公司的设
立、管理、破产清算等方面的规定。
2.澳大利亚破产与重整委员会（Australian Financial Security
Authority，AFSA）：该机构负责监管个人破产和公司破产的执行，确保破产程序按照法律规定进行。
立法模式：
澳大利亚的破产制度采用的是立法模式，即通过立法程序形成和修改相关法律。
具体的流程包括：
1.法案提出：政府或议会的成员提出关于破产制度的法案。
2.辩论与审查：法案在议会进行辩论和审查，议员可以提出修改
建议。
3.通过立法：如果法案通过投票获得多数支持，它将成为正式的
法律。
4.实施和执行：一旦法律通过，澳大利亚政府机构和破产法庭就
会根据新法律进行实施和执行。
澳大利亚的破产法体系是根据立法模式制定和修改的，以确保破产程序的合法性和公正性。
如果需要了解具体的法规细节，建议查阅澳大利亚的破产法相关文件或法规文本。
澳大利亚的会计制度(3篇)
第1篇一、引言澳大利亚作为一个发达的资本主义国家，其会计制度在全球范围内具有较高的声誉。
澳大利亚的会计制度以其严谨性、规范性和灵活性而著称，为澳大利亚的经济繁荣和社会稳定提供了有力保障。
本文将从澳大利亚会计制度的历史背景、体系结构、主要法规和会计准则等方面进行详细阐述。
二、澳大利亚会计制度的历史背景1. 澳大利亚会计制度的起源澳大利亚的会计制度起源于19世纪末，当时澳大利亚正处于快速发展的阶段。
随着经济的繁荣，企业规模不断扩大，会计工作逐渐成为企业经营管理的重要组成部分。
在此背景下，澳大利亚会计制度开始逐步建立和完善。
2. 澳大利亚会计制度的演变（1）20世纪初，澳大利亚会计制度开始与国际接轨，引进了英国、美国等国家的会计准则和制度。
（2）20世纪50年代，澳大利亚成立了会计职业组织，如澳大利亚会计师公会（Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia，ICAA）等，为会计行业提供了自律和规范。
（3）20世纪80年代，澳大利亚会计制度进一步与国际会计准则接轨，积极推动会计准则的制定和完善。
（4）21世纪初，澳大利亚会计制度在遵循国际会计准则的基础上，逐步形成了具有澳大利亚特色的会计体系。
三、澳大利亚会计体系的结构1. 澳大利亚会计职业组织澳大利亚会计职业组织主要包括澳大利亚会计师公会（ICAA）、澳大利亚特许会计师公会（CPA Australia）等。
这些组织负责制定和实施会计准则，为会计行业提供自律和规范。
2. 澳大利亚会计准则理事会（AASB）澳大利亚会计准则理事会（AASB）是澳大利亚会计准则的制定机构，负责制定和发布澳大利亚会计准则。
AASB的成员由会计职业组织、政府机构、企业代表等组成。
3. 澳大利亚证券交易所（ASX）澳大利亚证券交易所（ASX）负责监管上市公司，要求上市公司按照澳大利亚会计准则编制财务报告。
ASX对上市公司的财务报告进行审核，确保其真实、公允地反映公司的财务状况。
指澳大利亚公司法2001
学科的学士学位及更高学历；
(b) 具备在石油工程、石油生产地质学或石油地质学方面至少五年的
实践经验，其中至少三年是和石油储量、条件潜在资源和远景资
源的评估和估算相关；以及
是行业内专业的工程师、地质学家或其他地质学科学家组织的杰
出成员，其专业实践包括石油储量、条件潜在资源和远景资源的
评估和/或审计。专业组织必须：
术语
等值国际估算 同等效力的国际准则 托管期 评估日期 除权 勘探 提取 收费标准 金融服务牌照持牌人 财务报表
固定收益证券
Page 12 of 137
悉尼证券交易所 上市规则
2017 年 4 月 24 日
含义 (e) 可转换为上述(a)、(b)两条所涵盖的证券的金融产品；以及 (f) 任何悉尼证券交易所划分为股本证券的证券。 但不包括任何悉尼证券交易所划分为固定收益证券的证券。 按照同等效力的国际准则做出的国际估算或是悉尼证券交易所可接受的国际估算。
市场价格
就上市证券而言，指交易系统营业日结束收盘时显示的最近销售价格。
McfGEs
千立方英尺的气体当量。
持有的矿产 资源量和 矿 上市公司及其控股实体在矿产资源量和矿石储量中的总体经济利益
石储量
矿物
是指所有的固体矿物，包括钻石、其他宝石、工业矿物和煤，但不包括石油。
(a) 授予权或行使选择权；
(b) 强制执行担保并获取资产，或
(c) 收购部分资产。
公司法
指澳大利亚公司法(2001)
年度报告
包括详细的财务报表。
申请人
指希望以上市公司的形式于悉尼证券交易所正式挂牌上市的实体或个人。
核准结算机构
指在商业规则中赋予的含义。
ASIC
中国与澳大利亚会计制度与核算特点的比较
中国与澳大利亚会计制度与核算特点的比较
刘 新 乔乔 辽 宁师 范 大 学 辽 宁 大 连 １ １ ６ ０ ２ ９
摘要 ： 本文通过 对 中澳 两国的会计制度 ， 会 计规 范体 系及其相 关问题 的比较 ， 分析 澳大利 亚会计 的发展趋 势 ， 吸 收经
会计规范是指人们在从事与会计有关的活动时， 所应遵循的约束 性或指导 性的行为准则。由指导 、约束会计工作的专 门法律 、规则 和制度构成 ， 包括会计法、会计准则和会计制度。 会计制度是进行会计工作所应遵 循的规则、方法 、程序的总 称 。它是会计规范体系中可操作胜极强的规范 ， 是会计规范的三个不
同层次 ห้องสมุดไป่ตู้一 。
１ ． 澳大利亚会计规范体 系 （ １ ）《 公司法》。 公司法》是澳大利亚会计方面的最高法律 。 公司法 对会计管理仅作原则性的规定 ， 其有关会计管理的内容 主要体现在 公司法 的第３ 章第６ 节和 公司法实施细则》的第５ 条 中。对 《 公司法》确定的会计原则 ， 所有公司必须执行， 具有法律约 束力 。１ ９ ９ １ 年， 澳大利亚联邦国会对 公司法 进行了修订 ， 该法第 ２ ９ ２ 条和第２ ９ ３ 条规定 ， 公司的经理要向社会和有关部 门提供 资产负 债表 和 损益表》， 第２ ９ ７ 条规定， 公司实体必须保证财务报告符合 有 关要求， 包括 公司法实施细则》和ＡＡ Ｓ Ｂ ‘ Ｓ 会计准则的要求。 １ ９ ９ ４ ￣的 （ （ 公司法 改革法案， 修改了公司实体在报送财务报表 Ｅ 的 些规定。特别要求公司实体要每半年报送一次财务报表 ， 并须在半 年期限后的７ ５ 天内报出， 附上法定代表人的报告和注册会计师的审计 复议。澳大利亚会计年度是每年的７ 月１ 日至次年的６ 月３ ０ 日。１ ９ ９ ５ 年 提 出了简化公司法 的方案， 并于２ ０ ０ １ 年又重新颁布了 《 公司法》。 （ ２ ） 澳大利亚股票交易所制定和发布股票上市的规则 ， 包括有关 上市公司会计报表报送、财务资料披露等会计管理原则。这些规则 的执行， 是通过 匕 市公司实体和股票交易所共同签订契约协定来实现 的。不执行上市规则的公司， 可能失去上市资格。作为澳大利亚的公 司实体 ， 既要执行 公司法 有关会计的规定， 又要执行澳大利亚会 计准则委员会（ ＡＡ ｓ Ｂ 颍 发的会计准则 ， 如果是上市公司， 还要执行股 票交易所发布的上市公司会计规则。 ２ ． 我国的会计规范体系主要分为以下四个层次： 第—层次： 会计法律。会计法律是由全国人民代表大会常务委员 会制定的具有法律效力的有关会计规范方面的法律 。现阶段主要有 会计法》和 注册会计师法） ）。会计法中对于会计核算、会计监 督等的规定属于基础 洼的。 第二层次 ： 行政法规。行政法规主要是由国务 院颁布的会计法 规， 其法律效力仅次于会计法律。现阶段主要有 总会计 瞄 例 和 企业财务报告条冽 。 第三层次： 部门规章。此层次的会计规范主要是 由财政部颁布的 云计准则 会计制度 ， 是企 业进行会计核算、对外报告财务报告应该 遵守的具体标准。 ， 这—层次的会计准则、制度还包括三个等级： 基本 会计准则 ， 这是对财务会计原则性的规范 ， 是准则的基础 ； 具体的企业 会计准则 ； 会计准则指南。 第四层次 ： 规范胜文件 。目前主要有单位内部会喇 空 制规范以及 会计基础工作规范。
指澳大利亚公司法2001
属于可转换证券的固定收益证券。
根据上市公司的证券表决产生的决议，其目的是赋予公司证券的持有者以权利。
指以悉尼证券交易所认可的代名人之名义注册并由该代名人按照悉尼证券交易所
批准的条款持有的上市证券的实益权益份额。
(a) 和上市公司或相关的法人团体的证券相关的权益；以及
(b) 合同中的权益，其中董事是合同的一方或有权获利，同时合同给予董事要求或
Page 9 of 137
悉尼证券交易所 上市规则
2017 年 4 月 24 日
2.
定义
2.1
除非文义另有所指，否则下列词汇具有下文所载之含义：
术语
含义
会计参照日
就申请人和上市公司而言，指财务报表所使用财政年度的最后一天(在公司法规定
范围之内)。
收购
指收购或同意直接或以任何方式通过他人收购，其方式包括(但不限于)以下：
(a) 授予权或行使选择权；
(b) 强制执行担保并获取资产，或
(c) 收购部分资产。
公司法
指澳大利亚公司法(2001)
年度报告
包括详细的财务报表。
申请人
指希望以上市公司的形式于悉尼证券交易所正式挂牌上市的实体或个人。
核准结算机构
指在商业规则中赋予的含义。
ASIC
指澳大利亚证券及投资委员会。
审计师
与公司法第9条中“注册公司审计师”含义相同。
获得上市公司或相关的法人团体提供的股份、信用债券或管理投资计划中的
权益的权力。
注释：(a)中的定义与公司法的第205G(1)(a)条的内容相同； (b)中的定义与公司法的第205G(1)(b)条的内容相同
术语 董事声明 披露 发送日期
出售
澳大利亚公司法31-80
条例可修改公司立法的运作，以处理该立法与州和地区法律之间的相互作用（1）条例可修改公司法例的运作，以便：（a）公司法例的条文不适用于由规例所指明的国家或地区的法律处理的事宜；（b）在公司法例的条文的实施与条例所指明的国家或地区法律的条文的实施之间不会出现不一致。
（2）在不局限第（1）款的原则下，为施行该款而订立的规例可规定公司的法例的条文：（a）不适用于：（i）规例所指明的人；（ii）规例所指明的团体；（iii）规例所指明的情况；（iv）在规例所指明的情况下在规例中指明的人或团体法规；（b）不禁止在某种程度上该禁止会导致与国家或地区法律不一致的行为；（c）不要求任何人作出该要求所规限的作为，否则与国家或地区法律不一致；（d）不授权某人在某种程度上行使该当局对该人的任何行为，否则会导致与该国或该领土法律不一致；（e）没有规定某人在履行该义务的范围内有义务要求该人不履行根据该州或地区法律对该人施加的义务；（f）授权某人为公司法例的目的而做某事：该人：（i）根据州或地区法律有权执行；（ii）根据公司法例不会获授权作出；（g）如果国家或地区法律得到满足，将被视为满足。
（3）在本条中：事情包括作为，遗漏，机构，人或其它事情。
第1.2部分- 释义第1部分本部分的效力（1）本部条文为施行本法而有效，但在本法令中出现相反意向者除外。
（2）本部适用于以下目的：（a）第5.7部分；（b）第5章根据第5.7部分适用；（c）第9.2部分；犹如在本部中对某人或某法人团体的提述，包括对第5.7部分的提述。
（4）由于第11.2部分的规定，在特定时间生效的本法案规定，继续申请：（a）关于某人或某事物；（b）为特殊目的；则为施行该类条文的目的；（c）当其时有效的本部继续有效；（d）在以后时间有效的本部并无效力。
7其他解释条款的位置（1）本法案的大部分解释规定在本部分。
（2）但是，与第7章有关的解释规定应在该章开头处找到。
（3）此外，在某部分，分部或分部的解释条文，可在该部，分部或分部的开始处找到。
澳大利亚公司法：董事义务、关联交易和股东的救济
Directors’ duties1.Two sources of rules: a. General lawb.Statutory provisions (e.g. ss180 – 183; 191, 195,588G)2.Generally speaking, directors’ fiduciary duties are owed to the company rather thanindividual shareholders: Percival v Wright [1902] 2 Ch 421.3.However, A director may be treated as a “fact-based” fiduciary of an individual shareholderif the facts of the case warrants this conclusion: Brunninghausen v Glavanics (1999) 46NSWLR 536.4.The best interest of the company when the company is insolvent: the interests of thecreditors. Kinsela v Russell Kinsela (1986) 4 NSWLR 722:5.Care & diligence: s180Duty of care, skill, and diligence: s180(1)-Obligagee: directors and other officers-Standard of careFluid but objective: 1. Reasonable person in the def endant’s position2. responsibility within the company, etcIn determining the standard of care and diligence, Tort principles applied, how careful adirector should be in making decisions: ASIC v VineThe standard of care is determined by:-The magnitude of the risk of harm and the probability of it occurring-The seriousness of the loss that would result if the harm occurs;-And the expense, difficulty and inconvenience of taking alleviating actionCausation-Where a compensation order under s131H is sought, as was in Gold Ribbon, there is a need for the plaintiff to prove that loss or damage has been caused by the defendant through her breach of a civil penalty provision (s180 is a civil penalty provision)-Whether the plaintiff will suffer the losses because of the defendant breached the duty of care?-‘Business judgment rule’ defence: see s180(2)-Cases: Gold Ribbon (accountants) Pty Led v Sheers6.Good faith and proper purpose: s181Share issuance: Howard Smith Ltd v Ampol Petroleum Ltd [1974] AC 821. Permanent Power to enter into transactions on behalf of the company: Building Society (in liq) vWheeler(1994) 12 ACLC 674The power to register share transfer: Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd [1942] Ch 302Other cases: PBS V WHEELER; ASIC ADLER7.Improperly using of position: s182Improperly: R v Byrnes: TB[13.3.130]Gaining advantage for self or others OR causing damage to the companyCase: ASIC v soust; Adler, etc.Conflict of interests: Sections 182, 191, 194, 195➢Recall the Gildford Motor case;➢Transvaal Lands Co v New Belgium (Transvaal) Land and Development Co [1914] 2 Ch 488 Constitution: art 98:Directors or the firm where a director is a partner (“member”) can contract with the company, provided proper disclosure is made.Profits from office: Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1967] 2 AC 1348.Improperly using of information: s183ASIC V VizardR v ByrnesChew v R9.Insolvent trading: s588G-Obligagee: Directors: s588G(1)(a)-Circumstances where this head of duty may become an issue (the company’s state of solvency and reasonable grounds for suspecting, etc.: s588G(1)(e)-The circumstances in which the company is not permitted to incur a debta.The co is insolvent or becomes insolvent by incurring a debt s 588(1)(b), andb.There a reasonable ground for suspecting that the company is insolvent or would sobecome insolvent. S588G(1)(c)-The director will be personally liable for the company’s debts if he/she has breached the duty to prevent the company from trading when it is insolvent-Cases: Metropolitan Fire System Pty Ltd v Miller-Insolvencya.Cash flow test: s95A : a person is solvent if, and only if, the person is able to pay all theperson’s debts, as and when they become due and payable: s95A(1). A person who i snot solvent is insolvent: s95A(2)b.Presumption of insolvency: s588EContinuance of proved insolvency: s588E(3): when the company is being wound up and it has been proven that the company was insolvent at a point of time during the 12months ending on the filing of the winding up application – the company is presumed to be insolvent through that period.c.ASIC v Plymin (factors indicating the company’s state of solvency)-The ‘physical element (failure to prevent, etc)’: s588G(2)a.The contravening act. Failure to prevent the company from incurring a debt while thecompany is insolvent or to cause the insolvency.b.Example:•where a director acquiesced in the company continuing trading whileinsolvent(Lipton et al, 13.5.165)•Where a director refused to concur with the majority of the board but failed to take all practical steps to prevent the company from trading while insolvent: StatewideTobacco Services Ltd Morley (1990)•Where a director allows the company to continue to trade wile insolvent: Metropolitan Firec.How to prevent?•To stop the company from trading.•To take steps to have an administrator appointed (s588H(6))•To take steps to have the company wound up: Statewide Tobacco-‘Mental elements (be aware OR… ‘would be so aware’)’ : ss588G(2)(a), (b)a.The director must be aware at the time of the relevant transaction that there aregrounds for suspecting, etc (s588G(2) (a), ORb. A REASONABLE PERSON IN THE LIKE POSITION IN A COMPANY IN THE COMPANY’SCIRCUMSTANCES WOULD BE SO AWARE (s588G(2)(B))c.Actual awareness: subjective awareness. Harder to proved.Objective awareness: To illustrate: In Metropolitan Fire, Mr Miller had knowledge aboutthe facts listed above under ‘reasonable suspecting’. A reasonable person in Miller’sposition would have been aware that.-Defences: s588Ha.Reasonable grounds to expect company solvent. (s588H(2))•Expecting something requires a higher threshold of knowledge or awareness than to suspecting it. Expecting something implies a measure of confidence•Reasonable grounds – indicating factors(1)Whethe r the company’s creditors had already taken aggressive attitude towardsthe undischarged debts(2)Whether creditors have already taken enforcement actions(3)The likelihood that either the company or its directors to raise significant fundsin short orderb.Reliance on information from others (s588H(3)(a))•The defendant has reasons to believe:(1)That a competent and reliable person was responsible for the provision ofadequate information about whether the co is solvent; and(2)That the person was fulfilling that responsibility (s588H(3)(a))•And expected that the company was solvent at the time and would remain solvent if it incurred that debt, etc (s588H(3)(b))•The defendant made no reliance if:(1)The defendant’s opinion on the company’s solvency was formed on the b asis ofhis own observation – he did not rely on information provided by others.(2)No evidence shows that ‘other person’ has provided the defendant with anyinformation on the company’s state of solvency –which means that ‘otherperson’ has not ‘fulfilled that responsibility’(3)The defendant did not demand information from that ‘other person’, which isthe defendant’s duty•Director did not take part in management of co (s588H (4))•All reasonable steps taken (s588H(5))-Creditors’ s tanding to sue: ss588M; 588R-U-Remedies: ss588M(3) (s 1317H IS ALSO A POSSIBILITY)•The court’s power to issue a compensation order (to unsecured creditors) for a contravention of s 588G(2): s588J•Recovery of compensation against a defaulting director for loss resulting from insolvent trading (where the debt is wholly or partly unsecured and the co is beingwound up: by the liquidator (s588M (2)) AND CREDITOR (s588M(3))10.Duty of disclosure: ss191, 194,195-Directors who enter into a self-interested transaction with the company or otherwise put themselves in a conflict of interest situation which amounts to breach of their fiduciary duty must disclose the details of their personal interest and obtain the company’s full informed consent if they are to avoid liability for the breach. Examples of such conflict of interest situations include where a director:•Makes a personal profit that arises from their position•Diverts an opportunity from their company;•Or misuses confidential company information-As a general rule, directors’ fiduciary obligations require them to make full disclosure of their potential conflicts of interest to the company’s shareholders at a general meeting and obtain their consent.-Can also be reported to the board if the company’s constitution permit-S 194: permits directors of proprietary companies to have an interest in contracts with the company provided certain conditions are satisfied. The director must disclose the nature and extent of the interest at a directors’ meeting-S195(1), a director of a public company who has a material personal interest in a matter before the board is prohibited from voting on the matter and must not be present while the matter is being considered by the board meetingRelated Party transactions1.The basic rule: s208A public company must not give a financial benefit to a related party, and an entitycontrolled by a public company must not give a financial benefit to a related party of the public company-The obligagee: a public company or an entity controlled by a public company (controlled entity: s50AA)-Obligation: not to give financial benefit to ‘related parties’ and an entity controlled without the consent of the general meeting•Giving financial benefit: s229 (2)(1)Indirectly, i.e. through 1 or more interposed entities(2)Directly(3)By informal agreement that does not involve paying money•Financial benefit: s229(1)Giving or providing finance or property;(2)Buying an asset from or selling asset to the related party;(3)Leasing an asset from or to the related party (Cf the Kinsela case)(4)Supplying services to or receiving services from the related party;(5)Issuing securities or granting an option to the related party(6)Taking up or releasing an obligation of the related party•Controlled entity: the capacity to determine the outcome of decisions about the second entity’s financial and operating policies: s50AA•Related parties: s 228(1)Directors & their spouses: s228(2)(2)Relatives of directors & spouses:s228(3)(3)Entities controlled by other related parties: s228(4)(4)Related party in previous 6 months: s228(5)(5)Entity has reasonable grounds to believe it will become a related party in thefuture: s228(6)(6)Acting in concert with related party: s228(7)2.When is giving of a financial benefit permissible (s208(1))?-Approval by members-Gift must be given within 15 months of approval3.Exceptions: ss210 – 216 (where shareholder approval is not required)-Arm’s length terms: s210-Remuneration and reimbursement: s211-Indemnity, exemptions, insurance premium: s212-Small amount (up to $5000): s213(1)-Benefit to/from closely held subsidiary (100% ownership of all voting shares): s214-Benefits to members that do not discriminate unfairly: s215-Court order: s2164.Consequences of contravention of s 208: s209-Contravention does not invalidate the transaction: s209(1)-The public company or entity is not guilty of an offence: s291(1)(b)- A person involved in the contravention of s208 will contravene s 209(2), which is a civil penalty provision: s209(2)-Such a person commits an offence if the contravention involves dishonesty: s209(3)5.Cases: ASIC v Adler (2002) 41 ACSR 72Members’ remedies (ss236,237; see also the supplementary notes)1.Statutory derivative action: enables shareholders and other eligible applicants to bringlegal proceedings on behalf of a company where the company is unwilling or unable to do so itself.-Standing: s236(1)The following persons may bring proceedings on behalf of a company:• A member, former member or person entitled to be registered as a member of the company or of a related body corporate; or•Present or former directors and officers of the company-Conditions for granting the leave•Inaction on the part of the company: s237(2)(a)This may occur because a majority of shareholders or a liquidator have indicated anunwillingness to bring the action, the company has insufficient funds to bring theaction or the company is deadlocked by shareholder divisions;•Application in good faith: s237(2)(b)Requires the applicant to show that they would suffer a real and substantive injury ifa derivative action were not permitted, provided that the injury was dependentupon or connected with the applicant’s status as a shareholder or director: Cbabwanv Euphric Pty Ltd•Best interest of the company: s237(2)(c)This requires consideration of the company’s ‘separate and independent’ welfarerather than the applicant’s: Jeans v Deangrove Pty Ltd. Where the company is agoing concern, the interests of the company correspond to the interests of itsshareholders as a whole; whilst if the company is insolvent, its interests correspondto the interests of its creditors so the court will consider whether allowing theproceedings will in likelihood increase the return to creditorsSwansson v RA Pratt Properties Pty Ltd (2002) 42 ACSR 313.• A serious question to be tried: s237(2)(d)This requires the applicant to show an arguable case as the courts do not considerthe merits of the applicant’s case in depth at this stage: Carpenter v Pioneer ParkPty Ltd (in liq) (2004) 51 ACSR 299 at 360.Ragless v IPA Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq)•Cases: Ehsman v Nutectime International Pty Ltd; Swansson v Pratt; Ragless v IPA Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq); Charlton v Baber.-No need to consider remedies, as the crux is the conditions for obtaining a leave2.Section 461 winding up-The most useful provision under s 461 is s461(1)(k) (the just and equitable ground).-Standing: s462(2)Any one or more of the following may apply for an order to wind up a company •The company; or• A creditor (including a contingent or prospective creditor) of the company; or• A contributory; or•The liquidator of the company; or•ASIC•APRA-Circumstances on which a company can be wound up on the just and equitable ground •Deadlock: Re Yenidje Tobacco Co Ltd [1916] 2 Ch 426 (The only two members were equal shareholders and only directors. They became bitterly hostile to each other.The company constitution did not provide for a casting vote in case of a deadlock)•Failure of substratum: Re Haven Gold Mining Co (1982) 20 Ch D 151 (Coincorporated to run a given mine but it was unable to acquire the mine)Re Tivoli Freeholds Ltd•Loss of confidence: Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries Ltd [1973] AC 360; CB 529.•Public interest: ASIC v AS Nominees Ltd (1995) 52 FCR 504 (regular and repeated breaches of the former Corporations Law; mismanagement and misconduct in theconduct of the business of the company, the need for investor protection: Ford,14th:763).•Company incorporated to defraud: Re TE Brinsmead & Sons Ltd [1987] 1 Ch 406 (Co established to pass itself off as an existing reputable company to attract business). -For members’ remedies, the relevant circumstances include those where a deadlock exists (Re Yenidje Tobacco Co Ltd) and where the trust and confidence between members are lost (Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries Ltd).-Section 461 winding up is not fault-based3.Remedies for unfair & prejudicial conduct-S232 and 233 provides for a wide range of remedies that can be ordered at the instance of a person aggrieved by the oppressive or unfair conduct of a company controller or by the fact that the company was managed in a manner which is contrary to the interests of members as a whole, oppressive, unfairly prejudicial or unfairly discriminatory.-Standing: s234• A member of the company s234(a)• A person whose name has been removed from the registered as a member as a result of the selective reduction: s234(b)• A past member if the application relates to the circumstances in which they ceased to be a member: s234(c)• A person to whom a share has been transmitted by will or by operation of law: s234(d)• A person whom ASIC think appropriate, etc.: s234(e)-Oppressive or unfair conduct: ss232(a) – (e)-Matters amounting to unfairness: see supplementary notes•Exclusion from business: Mopeke Pty ltd v Airport Fine Foods Pty Ltd•Inadequate dividend payment whiles the directors obtains returns through directorial remunerations and other benefits: Re Sam Weller and Sons Ltd •Diversion of company profits: Sanford v Sanford Courier Pty Ltd•Directors’ failure to act in the best interest o f the company: Re Overton Holdings Pty Ltd•Improper share issue: Re Dalkeith Investments Pty Ltd•Diverting business opportunities: Fexuto Pty v Bosnjak Holding Pty Ltd-Available remedies: s233-Note that causes of action under s232 are fault-basedExternal administration – liquidation1.Types of liquidation•Voluntary liquidation (members’ and creditors’)•Compulsory (non-insolvent and insolvent)-Members’ voluntary winding up•Initiated by special resolution of the company: s491•And can only proceed as a members’ voluntary winding up if the company is solvent.A liquidator is then appointed by the members in general meeting: s495•Directors’ declaration of solvency: s494•Requires the leave of the court: s490-Creditors’ voluntary winding up•Only appropriate when the company is insolvent•When no declaration of solvency is made:(1)Liquidator to convene a meeting within 11 days after the day on which theresolution on voluntary winding up is made: s497(1)(2)7 days’ notice of meeting to creditors: s497(2)(3)Creditors may appoint their own liquidator: s497(11)•When the liquidator finds the co is insolvent -3 possibilities: s496(1)Compulsory winding up with court order: s496(1)(a), or(2)Appointing an administrator: s496(1)(b), or(3)Creditors’ voluntary winding up: s496(1)(c)•When the company is in a voluntary administration, the creditors either:(1)Fail to execute a Deed of Company Arrangement (DCA), or(2)Terminate the DCA and resolve to wind up the co, or(3)Resolve to wind up the co during the VA-Solvent compulsory winding up (s461 winding up)-Insolvent compulsory winding up•Proof of insolvency(1)Test of insolvency: s95A (Cash Flow)(2)Presumption of insolvency: see s459C. compare the presumption under s 588Ea.Failure to meet statutory demand;pany’s judgment debt not satisfied;c. A receiver or a receiver and manager appointed either under the contractualarrangement or under a court order for enforcing a floating charge;d. A person entered into possession or assumed control of corporate propertyto enforce a floating charge;e. A person was appointed to enter into possession or assume control.(3)Statutory demand: ss9 & 459E(1); Topfelt Pty Ltd v State Bank of NSW2.Standing to make an insolvent winding up application: s459P; Corporations regulations, reg5.4.01; Community Development Pty Ltd v Engwirda Construction Co.-Who may apply for order under s459A•The company;•The creditor, including a contingent or prospective creditor): Community Development Pty Ltd v Engwirda Construction Co (1969) 120 CLR 455 (A builderwho has done work but no Archi tect’s certification had been issued at the time ofapplication).• A contributory;• A director;• A liquidator or provisional liquidator;•ASIC;• A prescribed agent (i.e. APRA – Corp reg, 5.4.01).3.Effect of liquidation-On the co’s business – ceases to carry on business except where the liquidator believes that it is necessary for the beneficial disposal of the business: s477(1)(a)-On the directors and other officers – loss of management powers;-On members – loss of power of control, liable for call on the unpaid portion of the shares: s515-On creditors (Loss of individual right of enforcement (s468(4)) – the right of which is converted into one against a fund consisting of the co’s assets – proof of enforceable claims;secured creditor to retain its right to realise the security (s471C); note the position of the holder of a floating charge (s561).-On employees – winding up order = notice of dismissal: Re General Rolling Stock Co-On contracts – depends on the terms of the contract. (where there is an ipso facto (by the mere fact) clause that allows the other party to terminate the contract on the co’s winding up)-On other insolvency procedures•Receivership –receiver’s power of manage ment is revoked: Sheahan v Carrier Air Conditioner Pty Ltd4.Liquidators: qualifications, disqualification, appointment, powers and duties-Appointment by:•Members: s495•Creditors: s496•Courts: s472-Types and qualification requirements•Types(1)Unregistered (mem bers’ voluntary winding up for a Pty Ltd Co): s532(4);(2)Registered (registration with ASIC; creditors’ voluntary winding ups; members’voluntary winding ups when the co is a public co); qualifications in accounting(not less than 3 years) or commercial law including company law (not less than 2years): s1282(2)(3)An official liquidator: s1283. Only an official liquidator can be appointed by thecourt to be a provisional liquidator or liquidator: ss472(1)-(2); a compulsorywinding up must be carried out by an official liquidator: s532(8).•Disqualification of liquidators(1)Re National Safety Council of Australia [1990]. (a partner of the firm that hadprovided the company with accounting service could not be appointed as thecompany’s liquidator – conflict of interests.-Powers of liquidators: TB p.718In addition:•Sell the company’s legal actions (cause of actions), and•Disclaim property: s568 (i.e. property that is unrealisable and valueless and subject to rates or mortgage)(1)Re Nottingham General Cemetery Co [1955](2)A person whose rights are affected by the disclaimer can be treated as a creditorof the company: s568D(2)-Duties of liquidators•Commissioner for Corporate Affairs v Harvey(1)Duty of loyalty and duty of care –failure to put co’s money into liquidation tru staccount; unauthorised payments to own firm; used co’s money for personalexpenses, etc5.Voidable transactions-Unfair preference: s588FA•Rothmans Exports Pty Ltd v Mistmorn Pth Ltd (1994)-Uncommercial transactions: s588FB•Lewis v Cook-Insolvent transactions: s588FC•UP or UT that takes place when the co is insolvent or the co becomes insolvent because of the transaction-Relation back day (RBD): compulsory liquidation: the date on which the application for a winding up order is filed, etc; voluntary liquidation: the date on which the resolution on winding up is passed-Period of time permitted: see flowchart in lec. 10 ppt-‘Related entity’ see s9. Note the difference between ‘related entity’ and ‘related party’ for the purpose of the rules on related party transactions under ss208,209-Defences: s588FG-Remedies: s588FF(1)-Cases: Rothmans Exports Pth Ltd v Mistmorn Pty Ltd (unfair preference); Lewis v Cook (uncommercial transaction).Remedies and exoneration1.Civil penalty provisions (CPPs)-Certain provisions in the CA are enacted as CPPs. The first lot of CPPs were enacted in 1993.The breach of a CCP may result in more than one consequence. These include a civil penalty being imposed on and a compensation order being ordered against the defendant. In the exam, you will need to discuss consequences of a breach according to whether you arerequired to discuss remedies only or consequences of a breach generally.-You should try and summarise the CPPs we have studies (directorial duties including the duty re insolvent trading and duties of disclosure, related party transaction, etc).Three types of civil penalty orders to punish people who contravene designated civilpenalty provisions:• A pecuniary penalty of up to $200000 for contraventions of the corporation/scheme civil penalty provisions: s1317G(1). The pecuniary penalty for contraventions of thefinancial services civil penalty provisions is $1 m for bodies corporate and $200000for individuals: s1317G(1B)•Disqualification from management: s206C; and•Compensation for damage suffered: s1317H-For a complete list of CPPs, see s1317E- A civil penalty order cannot be made in the absence of a court declaration that a CPP has been contravened. On court declaration, see s1317E.- A compensation order can be made with or without a court declaration of contravention: S1317H-The court’s power of imposing a civil penalty is provided under s1317G-The court’s power of making compensation orders is stipulated in s1317H-On the standing of applying for a declaration or an order (civil penalty or compensation): s1317J2.Statutory injunction: s1324-Under s1324(1), the court has a discretion to grant an injunction restraining a person from engaging in conduct that contravenes the CA. in addition, the court may, if it thinks it is desirable to do so, require that person to do any act or thing.-The court may also order that the person acting in contravention of the CA pay damages to any other person: s1324(10)3.Remedies provided in specific duty regime. Example: remedies under the insolventtrading regime: s588M(3); REMEDIES FOR VOIDABLE TRASACTIONS: S588FF(1)4.Remedies that can be sought by members directly, see part 3above (ss232, 233, 236,237, 461, etc.)5.Note that remedies available depends on, among other things, the basis of the legalaction. For example, statutory remedies are available where the basis of the action is abreach of a statutory obligation. General law remedies (in our context mainly equitable remedies) are available where the allegation is that the defendant has breached ageneral law duty (such as fiduciary obligations).6.Exoneration and relief-For exoneration and permitted indemnity by the company, as well as relief for contravention of CA (except for criminal offences), see lec. 8 ppt-S191-Directors who breach their fiduciary duties to a solvent company may be excused from liability if ratified•By the general meeting: Furs v Tomkies•By the board: QLD mines Ltd v Hudson; ss191•No ratification where company insolvent: Kinsela•No ratification where misappropriation of corporate assets or diversion of corporate opportunity is involved: Cook v Deeks•Shareholders are unable to ratify a breach of directors’ statutory duties: Angas Law Services Pty Ltd v Carabelas•Fiduciary duties:(1)Act in good faith in the best interests of the company;(2)Exercise their powers for proper purposes;(3)Retain their discretionary powers; and(4)Avoid undisclosed conflicts of inters-Exemption: a company or related body corporate must not exempt an officer or auditor, directly or through an interposed entity, from liability to the company: s199A(1)-Indemnity(赔偿金) other than legal costs – permitted except for:• A liability owed to the co or related body corporate• A liability for monetary penalty• A liability owed to someone other than the co, etc incurred in bad faith: s199A(2) -Indemnity for legal cost allowed except where the defendant is found guilty or liable: s199A(3)-Court relief – possible except for criminal offence (ss1317S, s1318)Conditions:•The person has acted honestly.•Circumstances warrants it: s1317S(2)•Factors to consider in exercising discretion: ASIC v Vines(1)The degree of care with which the person has acted(2)The degree to which the contravening conduct departed from the standard ofreasonableness prescribed by statutory duties;(3)Contrition after the event(4)Seriousness of contravention(5)Competent advice obtained and followed?(6)Conduct in line with established practice?(7)Has the defendant been paid for engaging in the contravening conduct?。
澳大利亚公司法：董事和股东会议规则
澳大利亚公司法：董事、股东会议规则1.Sweet Treats, Inc. is a “closely held” or “closer” corporationCorporations are often classified with various features. One of them is whether the corporation issues shares to the public. Its shares are not publicly sold and bought and ne eds no registration. As stated in the case, Sweet Treats, Inc. (“STI”) is a corporation which is solely owned by four shareholders: Andy, Brittney, Carol and Dell. Each owns 25% of STI. STI has not issued any shares to the public now. The four shareholders are also members of the board of directors. This kind of corporation is also called “private company”.2.As a director of the corporation, Andy causes inconvenience to the board of directors, and may damage the interests of the shareholdersAs stated in the case, Andy had become harder to work with. Over the last year, he wears bright red clothing every day from head to toe; he sang in communications; he brought lunch that smell terrible to work. All of above behaviors may affect the normal running of the company. His inappropriate wearing may affect the image of the company since he possesses the position of director. When communicating he chose to present him through song lyrics, he sang in all communications. The behavior may gives bad impacts upon the effect of communications, the effect and efficiency of his work and may affect the good impression of the company. As for brings lunch to work which has bad smelt, it may obstructs his colleagues from working efficiently. The relationship between him and his colleagues thus is very bad.3.As Andy, Brittney, Carol and Dell are solely shareholders and directors of the corporation, they may agree on how and who they will elect to the board of directors of the corporation3.1Shareholders may agree to elect each other as directorsShareholders are the owner of a corporation in fact. As a general rule, shareholders may agree on how they will. Certainly, shareholders may also reach an agreement to elect each other to the board of directors since an ownership grants them supreme and absolute power and rights over their corporation. But when they are appointed to the board, as directors owes a fiduciary duty to the company and shall use their position and exercise their rights for the best benefits of the company.The above analysis demonstrates that Andy, Brittney, Carol and Dell have rights to agree on the election of any of them to the board of directors. Brittney, Carol and Dell may agree to elect each other as directors. Since the three directors wanted to remove Andy from the position of a director, they may remove him through reaching an agreement which does not elect Andy to the board of directors. Generally, Brittney, Carol and Dell should not use the position of directors to reach such agreement inconsistent with obligations owed to the company as directors. But as analyzed above, the behaviors of Andy had breached his obligations as a director and harmed the interests of the other shareholders and the company. Brittney, Carol and Dell may also use their positions as directors to reach the agreement because this is not inconsistent with their fiduciary duties owed to the corporation.3.2The rule of “shareholder unanimity exception”A corporation is actually owned by its shareholders. An owner is granted a full scope of ri ghts and interests to his things. The rule of “shareholder unanimity exception” represents that if a decision has been agreed by all shareholders of a corporation, the efficacy of the decision will be supreme. The rule exists provided that a decision of the board of directors does not comply with the interests of the shareholders.It is the best state if Andy also agrees to elect Brittney, Carol and Dell to the board of directors and agrees not to elect himself as a director. In case the aforesaid circumsta nce happens, the rule of “shareholder unanimity exception” will apply and Andy will be smoothly removed from the board without any legal risks. But it seems an unhappy arrangement and it is unreasonable to expect Andy to agree to such arrangement. But even though Andy is not a party to the agreement which does not nominate him as a director the agreement may be still enforceable, provided that: (1) the corporation is a closer held corporation. As analyzed in part 1, Sweet Treats, Inc. is a “closely held” or“closer” corporation. (2) Other shareholders do not object the agreement; (3) terms of the agreement are reasonable. So if Andy objects the agreement then it will be unenforceable. Actually Andy may be very likely to object the agreement. Agreement between the three shareholders, Brittney, Carol and Dell, to remove Andy from the board of directors is not so exercisable.3.3Removal of Andy is for the best benefits of all shareholders and the corporation As mentioned in part 2, Andy may cause damages to the shareholders and the corporation. As stated in the case, any replacement for Andy may probably require a salary of 75000 dollars a year, which is 25000 dollars less than before. What STI shareholders Agreement provides protect the shareholder who is fired by the corporation. In order to minimize potential liabilities, the board may choose to fire Andy and at same time nominate him other position.Finally, I would suggest Brittney, Carol and Dell the following course of action which may minimize their potential liability: (1) Notify all shareholders of the corporation to hold a meeting of the shareholders; (2) reach an agreement which elect Brittney, Carol and Dell as the directors of the corporation; (3) while remove Andy from the board of directors nominate Andy a other position to avoid repurchase of his shares by the company(the Shareholders Agreement only provides shares of shareholders who ceases to be employed by STI should be repurchased).。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
2001年公司法目录2001年公司法经修正的2001年第50号法令经修正的2001年第50号法令。
本汇编是在2005年7月14日编制的，考虑到2005年第100号法令的修正案。
在该日期生效的任何修正案的案文均附于说明部分。
已纳入的修正案的操作可能会受到“说明”部分中规定的应用条款的影响由堪培拉总检察长办公室立法起草和出版处编写。
对公司，金融产品和服务以及其他目的作出规定的法律。
第1章- 介绍第部分- 初步1. 简称[见注1]本法可引称为“2001年公司法”。
2.开始[见注1]该法案在公告确定的一天开始。
3.本法的宪法依据（1）本法在参照国的运作是基于：（a）英联邦议会根据“宪法”第51条（第51（xxxvii）段除外）的立法权；（b）英联邦议会在本法所涉事项方面的立法权力，因为这些事项由提交国议会根据“宪法”第51（xxxvii）段提交。
注意：国家转介人充分补充英联邦议会的其他权力，将这些事项提交给英联邦议会，以免他们未被纳入联邦议会的立法权力。
（2）本法在北领地和首都地区的运作基于：（a）英联邦议会根据“宪法”第122条为这些领土的政府制定法律的立法权；（b）英联邦议会根据“宪法”第51条规定的立法权力。
尽管“1901年法令释义法令”第22（3）条适用于该领土，本法令是英联邦的法律。
（3）本法在澳大利亚以外的运作基于：（a）英联邦议会根据“宪法”第51（xx）段规定的立法权；（b）英联邦议会根据“宪法”第51条规定的其他立法权力；（c）英联邦议会根据“宪法”第122条为这些领土的政府制定法律的立法权力。
（4）本法在不是提及国的国家的运作是基于：（a）英联邦议会根据第51条（第51（xxxvii）段除外）和“宪法”第122条规定的立法权力；（b）英联邦议会在本法所涉事项方面的立法权力，因为这些事项由国议会根据“宪法”第51（xxxvii）段提交。
4. 参照各国州议会对英联邦议会的事项（1）如果国家议会为“宪法”第51（xxxvii）段的目的将第（4）和（5）款所述事项提交给英联邦议会：（a）如果这些事项没有另外列入联邦议会的立法权力（但不是根据“宪法”第51（xxxvii）段提及的情况）；（b）如果以及在何种程度上将这些事项列入国家议会的立法权力。
除第（6）及（7）款另有规定外，本款具有效力。
（2）即使国家参考法案包括一项规定，即国家参照法中没有任何规定旨在根据修正案提出的法律能够以唯一或主要的目的，但对于国家参考法中的该条款，法律将是关于通过修正案提及联邦议会的事项的基本事由。
（3）即使一国的法律规定，凡提及英联邦议会对第（4）款和第（5）款所涵盖的任何一项或两项事项的提述是在特定情况下终止，则该国即为指控国。
参考覆盖初始公司法和ASIC的行为（4）本款通过在初始“公司法”和初始“专利法”中包括提及的条款，涵盖了关于引用条款涉及就这些事项制定法律的程度的事项。
涉及本法案和ASIC法案的修订（5）本款通过对本法或ASIC法案进行明确修订，涵盖公司成立，公司法规以及金融产品和服务的法律法规范围内的事项。
终止的参考作用（6）如果国家的最初提及终止，国家不再是指控国。
（7）如果以下情况，国家不再是指控国：（a）国家的修正案提案终止；（b）第（8）款不适用于终止。
（8）一国如不能终止其修正案提案，则不再停止成为指控国：（a）该终止受该国总督以宣布为终止日期的影响；（b）固定的日期不得早于公布宣布的日期起计的6个月期间结束后的首日；（c）该国的修正案提及，每一其他国家的修正案提及，在同一天终止。
定义（9）在本条中：国家的修正提及意味着国家议会提及英联邦议会第（5）款所涵盖的事项。
明确修改本法或ASIC法是指通过英联邦法案对本法案或ASIC法案文本的直接修改（无论是通过插入，省略，废除，替换或重新安排文字或内容），但不包括英联邦法“颁布一项已经或将会具有实质性效力的条款，作为本法案或ASIC法案文本的一部分。
初始ASIC法案是指最初颁布的ASIC法案。
初始公司法“是指最初颁布的该法案。
一国首次提及是指国家议会向联邦议会提及第（4）款所涵盖的事项。
参照规定意味着：（a）初始公司法;（b）最初的ASIC法; 他们在何种程度上处理包括在各国议会的立法权力中的事项。
一国的国家参考法是给予初始参考和修正参考的法律。
5法的一般领土适用“本辖区”的地理覆盖（1）第9节将此管辖权定义为包括以下内容的区域：（a）每个提及国（包括其沿海）；（b）首都领地（包括杰维斯湾沿岸地区的沿海）；（c）北领地（包括其沿海）；（d）为施行第7章的条文或相关条文（见第（10）款）而适用的条文- 该条文因第（9）款而适用的任何外地区（但只限于提供的范围在该款）。
（2）在本法中，该管辖权包括：（a）：（i）整个澳大利亚（如果所有国家都是参照国）；（ii）澳大利亚（除非任何参照国之外的任何国家）如果一个或多个国家不是参照国；（b）也适用于第7章条文或相关条文（见第（10）款）或与之相关的任何外地领土- 因第（9）款而适用的任何外地领土（但只限于本节）。
本管辖范围内的操作（3）本法令的每一条款适用于本司法管辖区。
本司法管辖权以外的行为（4）除第（8）款另有规定外，本法令的每项条文亦根据其条款适用于该司法管辖区以外的作为及不作为。
居住地，地方等。
（7）本法令的每一条款根据其条款适用于：（a）自然人：（i）居住在该司法管辖区；（ii）居住在澳大利亚；（iii）澳大利亚公民；（b）所有法人团体和非法人团体：（i）本司法管辖区内成立或经营业务；（ii）在澳大利亚成立或经营业务。
注：（b）段- 本法案中的许多条款仅适用于公司（即根据本法注册的公司）。
在非参照国操作（8）本法案不适用于未涉及国家；如若应用，一定程度上是超越了宪法第51（xxxvii）和（xxxix）段规定的国会的立法权。
扩大适用第七章的规定和相关规定（9）条例可规定，在特定情况下，为第7章的具体规定（适用规定）的目的，在本管辖区内包括指定的外部领土。
如果规定如此：（a）适用的条款在该外国领土适用于这种情况；（b）有关适用条文的有关条文（见第（10）款）适用于该境外地区关乎如此适用的条文。
相关规定的含义（10）就本条而言，与第7章的条文有关的有关条文如下：（a）第1,9条的条文（包括构成罪行的第部第2分部的条文，以及第B），10条适用于该条文，或就该条文而言具有效力；（b）为施行（a）段所述的任何条文而根据本法生效的任何规例或其他文书（包括任何产生罪行或容许作出罚款命令的罪行）；（c）如为第（9）款的目的而订立的规例是关于本条例的任何其他条文或根据本法而订立的任何规例或其他文书（包括任何产生罪行或容许罚款命令）。
5A对官方适用（1）为免生疑问，本条中对官方在某项权利中的提述，包括提述官方在该项权利中的工具或机构（不论是否为法人团体）。
（2）第5章（第部除外）对皇家在英联邦，每个国家，首都特区，北领地和诺福克岛的权利施加限制。
（3）第6,6A，6B，6C和6D条：（a）在英联邦的权利内约束官方；（b）不对任何国家，首都地区，北领地或诺福克岛的权利施加约束力。
（4）第6CA或7条的条文只会以特定身分对官方施加约束力.在规例中指明的情况（如有的话）。
（5）本法令中没有任何规定使官方有任何权利受到金钱上的惩罚，或因犯罪而被起诉。
5BASIC具有本法的一般管理根据ASIC法案，ASIC具有本法案的一般管理。
5C1901年“法令释义法令”的适用范围（1）直至2003年“立法文书（过渡性及相应修订）法令”（“立法文书”生效日期）第4条的生效日期为止，2000年11月1日生效的“1901年法令释义法令”适用于本法。
（2）在“立法会议事规则”生效日期当日及之后，当日有效的“1901年法令释义法令”适用于本法。
（3）在法律文书生效日之后对“1901年法令释义法令”作出的修订，不适用于本法令。
第部分- 公司立法与州和地区法律之间的相互作用5D报道的部分（1）本部只适用于在该司法管辖区的一个国家或地区的法律。
（2）本部分仅适用于以下公司法例：（a）本法（包括根据本法制定的规章）；（b）ASIC法第3部分;和（c）为该法案第3部分的目的根据ASIC法案制定的法规。
（3）本部分不适用于ASIC法第3部分，或为该法案第3部分的目的而根据该法律制定的法规，在其违反该法案第2部分第2节的范围内运作5E并发操作的目的（1）公司法并不旨在排除或限制同时执行某一国家的任何法律。
（2）在不限制第（1）款的原则下，公司法例并非旨在排除或限制某一国家或地区的法律同时实施：（a）对下列事项规定额外的义务或责任（不论是刑事或民事责任）：（i）公司或其他法团的董事或其他高级人员；（ii）公司或其他团体；（b）授予以下权力：（i）公司或其他法团的董事或其他高级人员；（ii）公司或其他团体；（c）规定成立法人团体；（d）对某人在公司或其他团体中持有或取得的权益施加附加限制；（e）防止某人：（i）为董事；（ii）参与管理或控制公司或其他团体；（f）要求公司：（i）订立宪章；（ii）在其章程中有特别规则。
注：（a）段- 包括对公司或其他机构规定额外的报告义务。
（3）在不限制第（2）款的情况下，该款中提述某一国家或地区的法律，施加义务或法律责任或授予权力，包括提述某一国家或地区的法律，借以施加义务或法律责任，提述公司被注册所在的州或领地。
（4）如果公司立法和该法律之间存在直接一致性，则本节不适用于国家或地区的法律。
注：第5G条通过限制公司法的运作，防止在某些情况下产生的直接不一致。
被裁定犯上其他罪行。
（5）如：（a）任何人的作为或不作为，既属违反公司法例的罪行，又属于根据一个国家或地区的法律所订罪行；（b）该人被裁定犯上述任何一项罪行; 该人无须就该另一罪行而被定罪。
5F公司立法不适用于由州或地区法律宣布为排除事项的事项（1）如某国家或地区的法律的条文为本条的目的而声称某事宜是已排除事宜，则适用第（2）款：（a）整个公司的法例；（b）公司法例的指明条文；（c）公司法例而非指明条文；（d）公司法例以外的指定范围。
（2）借本款的效力：（a）如果该声明是第（1）（a）款适用的声明，则公司立法（本节除外）的任何条款均不适用于该国家；（b）如果该声明是第（1）（b）款适用的声明，则公司法例的指明条文在该国家或地区不适用于该事宜；（c）如果该声明是第（1）（c）款适用的声明，公司立法（本节和具体规定除外）的规定不适用于该事项的国家或地区；（d）如果该声明是第（1）（d）款适用的声明，则公司法例（本条除外，但不包括在指明范围内）的条文不适用于该国家或地区。
（3）第（2）款不适用于该条例规定该款不适用于该声明的声明。