Devil in the detail – proposed exclusions from the Ipso Facto Stay

Articles Written by Ben Renfrey (Partner), Nicholas Edwards (Senior Associate), Sara Gaertner (Senior Associate)

The introduction of legislation creating a stay on enforcement of ipso facto clauses was reported in our September 2017 article. However, the devil was always going to be in the detail, and in particular the type of rights and contracts excluded from the operation of the new law.

On 16 April 2018 Treasury released exposure drafts (which can be accessed here) of the Corporations Amendment (Stay on Enforcing Certain Rights) Regulations 2018 (Regulations) and the Corporations (Stay on Enforcing Certain Rights) Declaration 2018 (Declaration). The Regulations relate to contracts, agreements or arrangements. The Declaration relates to kinds of rights. Each set out significant and wide ranging exclusions from the stay.

Key points

In our view, the proposed Regulations and Declaration outline commercially sensible exclusions from the operation of the stay. (Please note that there are in excess of 30 types of contracts, agreements, arrangements and 10 kinds of rights which are excluded). 

For example, the proposed Regulation 5.3A.50(2)(h) excludes from the stay an agreement for the sale of all or part of a business. That is, the vendor or purchaser which is not insolvent remains entitled to terminate the sale agreement. In our view, this is sensible.  The approach taken to this particular exclusion promotes the aim of the reform (while sensibly seeking to avoid unintended consequences). This attitude appears to have been adopted to all of the proposed carve outs, save that there will be the inevitable uncertainty, in some cases, about whether or not the contract, agreement, arrangement or right is one falling into these excluded categories.

Contracts not subject to stay

Other categories of contracts, agreements and arrangements that will not be subject to the ipso facto stay include:

  • Arrangements relating to laws and international obligations;
  • Government licences or permits;
  • Arrangements relating to securities and financial products;
  • Complex arrangements between sophisticated parties;
  • Arrangements relating to debt and the ranking of creditors;
  • Arrangements relating to financial markets, and clearing and settlement facilities;
  • Netting arrangements; and
  • Post 30 June 2018 contracts arising from variation, novation or assignment of a contract entered into before 1 July 2018.

Rights not subject to stay

The kinds of rights that will not be subject to the ipso facto stay include:

  • Uplift clauses and indemnification;
  • Termination rights in a standstill or forbearance arrangement;
  • Rights to change the priority in which amounts are to be paid;
  • Rights of set-off and acceleration of such rights;
  • Rights of assignment and novation;
  • Certain self-executing provisions; and
  • Step-in rights.

The right to appoint a controller will also be excluded from the stay where certain circumstances are satisfied. This proposed carve-out recognises that contractual arrangements between parties as to the priority of secured creditors in insolvency events and the exercise of rights should not be disturbed, and prevents an outcome which promotes a race between creditors to appoint a controller.


The exposure drafts appear to have taken a commercially sensible approach to the proposed exclusions from the ipso facto stay. This approach provides breathing room for viable but financially distressed or insolvent companies by allowing continued operations (that is, prohibiting certain counterparties from seeking to terminate or hold the relevant entity “to ransom”) while the underlying business is restructured or sold for value, ultimately for the benefit of creditors. 

It is anticipated following the consultation period ending on 11 May 2018 that the stay, the Regulations and Declaration will commence on 1 July 2018.

Important Disclaimer: The material contained in this article is comment of a general nature only and is not and nor is it intended to be advice on any specific professional matter. In that the effectiveness or accuracy of any professional advice depends upon the particular circumstances of each case, neither the firm nor any individual author accepts any responsibility whatsoever for any acts or omissions resulting from reliance upon the content of any articles. Before acting on the basis of any material contained in this publication, we recommend that you consult your professional adviser. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation (Australia-wide except in Tasmania).

Related insights Read more insight

Indonesian airline ‘flying high’: High Court confirms foreign entity immunity from winding up

The High Court of Australia has upheld the New South Wales Court of Appeal decision that foreign state immunity extends to a national airline subject to a winding up proceeding. The High Court held...

Launching our 2023 Insolvency & Restructuring Case Summaries publication

We are delighted to share with you the next edition of our Insolvency & Restructuring Case Summaries. With over 45 case summaries highlighting the key takeaways and the practical implications for...

Now you own it, now you don’t: retention-of-title supply arrangements

A recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Metal Manufacturers Pty Ltd trading as TLE Electrical v WesTrac Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 144 (WesTrac decision) has highlighted some of the...