Going-concern sale in liquidation may be flexibly pursued to maximise value, preserve jobs, and comply with the framework.

A liquidator's sale process is expected to comply with the liquidation framework through public announcements, invitations to interested persons, and fair access for bidders; on the stated facts, the process was found adequately publicised and not exclusionary. Sale of the corporate debtor as a going concern was treated as a value-maximising approach consistent with preservation of employment, and the liquidation timelines were described as directory and capable of flexible application in exceptional circumstances. The commentary also notes the relevance of section 230 compromise efforts, section 35(1)(e), section 29A eligibility, and consultation committee procedures before resorting to sale of assets in parcels.

---

---

Issues: Whether the liquidator had acted in accordance with the liquidation directions and regulations, and whether a further limited period should be granted to pursue sale of the corporate debtor as a going concern before resorting to sale of assets in parcels or otherwise.

Analysis: The liquidator had issued public announcements, extended timelines, invited expressions of interest, and circulated invitations to interested persons; the record did not support the allegation that the process lacked adequate publicity or that prospective bidders were excluded. The earlier directions to explore compromise or arrangement under section 230 had not yielded a compliant proposal within the stipulated period, and the subsequent process continued to proceed toward sale as a going concern. The Tribunal held that sale as a going concern promotes preservation of employment and maximisation of value, and that the liquidation regulations prescribing timelines are directory and may be flexibly applied in exceptional circumstances. The Tribunal also noted the relevance of section 35(1)(e) on beneficial liquidation, section 29A eligibility, the consultation committee mechanism, and the need to adhere to the statutory framework while still attempting value-maximising sale.

Conclusion: The challenge to the liquidator's conduct was rejected, but a further six weeks were granted to complete the exercise of selling the corporate debtor as a going concern, subject to compliance with the directed earnest money deposit requirement.

---