ASIC brings first charge over non-compliance with company property return order in Queensland

Traders Union
All News
Regulators
ASIC charge over property return

Highlights

ASIC charged Nguyen on 6 November 2026 for failing to return a Honda Odyssey to Verotti Pty Ltd's liquidator as ordered on 3 December 2025.
ASIC determined Nguyen's vehicle transfer was a voidable creditor-defeating disposition, as he paid no consideration and the asset was withheld from creditors during winding up.
Non-compliance with ASIC property return orders is a criminal offence and undermines the insolvency process by preventing company asset recovery for creditors.

Charge stems from vehicle transfer order

As reported by ASIC, Nguyen appeared at the Beenleigh Magistrates’ Court on 6 November 2026 charged with failing to comply with an order made under section 588FGAA(3) of the Corporations Act. The regulator says it ordered him on 3 December 2025 to return the Honda Odyssey to the liquidator of Verotti Pty Ltd within 20 business days of receiving the order.

ASIC says the order was issued at the liquidator’s request after it determined the transfer of the vehicle to Nguyen was a voidable creditor-defeating disposition. The regulator says Nguyen paid no consideration for the vehicle and that the transfer kept the asset from being available for the company’s creditors during the winding-up process.

The matter is being prosecuted by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, following a referral from ASIC. The case has been adjourned to 4 December 2026.

Implications for insolvency enforcement

ASIC says its order was intended to restore the vehicle to the company so the liquidator could realise its value for creditors. The regulator says compliance with such orders is important to recovering assets in liquidation and that failure to comply can weaken the insolvency process by preventing property from being returned to the creditor pool.

Under the Corporations Act, ASIC can make orders to undo the effects of a voidable creditor-defeating disposition once a liquidator has been appointed and a company is being wound up. Those powers can include directing a recipient to return the property, pay an amount representing benefits received from the disposition, or transfer other property representing the proceeds of the original asset.

A creditor-defeating disposition is a disposal of company property that prevents, hinders or significantly delays that property from becoming available for creditors in a winding up. ASIC says failing to comply with one of its orders is a criminal offence.

In our earlier article, we covered a Court of Appeal ruling in Malaysia that held a commission-based “partner” at a law firm personally liable for an unpaid portion of a property sale price, overturning lower-court findings. The decision clarified that salaried or commission partners may still be treated as partners under the Partnership Act 1961, potentially widening liability exposure for certain law-firm and professional partnership structures.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.