You’re sitting at your desk, looking at the cash flow forecast. The numbers don’t add up. There’s supplier pressure, the bank is asking questions, and you’re starting to wonder whether the business is insolvent.
And now you’re facing the question that keeps directors awake at night: if you keep trading while you try to turn this around, are you personally liable for new debts?
This is exactly the situation the safe harbour defence was designed for. But understanding what it does, how it works, and what you need to do to rely on it is critical. Because safe harbour isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s a framework for making defensible decisions when your business is under strain.
If you’re worried about insolvent trading, this article walks you through what safe harbour actually means for you.
Key Takeaways
- Safe harbour protects directors from civil insolvent trading claims when they’re pursuing a credible restructuring plan that’s reasonably likely to produce a better outcome than immediate liquidation or administration
- You must meet strict eligibility conditions including paying employee entitlements and superannuation, meeting tax reporting obligations, and keeping proper books and records
- Safe harbour only covers civil insolvent trading liability and does not protect against criminal insolvent trading, breaches of other director duties, or personal guarantees
- The defence applies individually to each director based on their own actions and decision-making, which matters if your board is divided on strategy
- Documentation is everything because if a liquidator sues you later, you’ll need board minutes, advice letters, cash flow models, and evidence of a genuine restructuring plan
- Safe harbour can still apply even if the business ultimately fails provided you met the conditions and pursued a genuine course of action during the relevant period
What safe harbour actually does for directors
Let’s start with what safe harbour is, in plain English.
Safe harbour is a legal defence to civil insolvent trading claims. It protects you from personal liability for debts the company incurs while you’re pursuing a genuine plan to turn the business around or achieve a better outcome than immediate liquidation.
Without safe harbour, if your company is insolvent and you allow it to keep trading, you can be personally liable for debts incurred during that period. The law imposes that duty to prevent directors from recklessly trading on while creditors bear the risk.
But safe harbour recognises that sometimes the best outcome for creditors is not immediate closure. Sometimes there’s a path to recovery, or a controlled wind-down, or a sale that preserves value. If you’re genuinely pursuing that path, safe harbour gives you breathing room.
The critical word there is “genuinely”. You need a credible plan. You need to take real steps. You need to document what you’re doing and why.
Safe harbour isn’t a loophole. It’s a framework for making difficult decisions in a way that courts will recognise as responsible and defensible.
Safe harbour doesn’t stop your company from being insolvent, and it doesn’t erase director duties. It carves out a specific protection from civil insolvent trading claims when you’re actively working to achieve a better outcome than liquidation.
What safe harbour does not cover
Before we go further, it’s important to understand the limits of safe harbour.
Safe harbour only protects you from civil insolvent trading claims under the Corporations Act. It does not protect you from:
- Criminal insolvent trading, which involves dishonesty or fraud. If you’re deliberately hiding the company’s financial position or knowingly incurring debts with no intention of paying them, safe harbour won’t help you.
- Breaches of other director duties, such as acting in the best interests of the company or avoiding conflicts of interest. Safe harbour is specific to insolvent trading liability.
- Personal guarantees. If you’ve personally guaranteed company debts, those guarantees remain enforceable regardless of safe harbour.
- Preference claims or uncommercial transactions. Liquidators can still challenge payments or transactions the company made during insolvency under other provisions of the Act.
Think of safe harbour as an umbrella that only covers one particular kind of rain. It’s powerful protection for that specific risk, but you’re still exposed to other weather.
If you’re relying on safe harbour, you still need to meet all your other director obligations. You still need to act honestly, in good faith, and in the best interests of the company as a whole.
Safe harbour is not a substitute for proper legal and restructuring advice. It’s a defence you can use if you’ve done the work and made defensible decisions. If you’re just hoping things improve without a real plan, safe harbour won’t protect you.
When you should start thinking about safe harbour
Timing matters. Safe harbour is only available if you start taking action when you first suspect the company may be insolvent, or is likely to become insolvent.
So when is that?
Signs that you should be thinking about safe harbour include:
- The company is struggling to pay creditors on time, or you’re regularly juggling who gets paid and when
- Cash flow forecasts show that without new capital or revenue, the company will run out of money within weeks or months
- Suppliers are tightening credit terms, or putting you on cash-on-delivery
- The bank is asking for updated financials, or is tightening covenants on existing facilities
- You’re relying on director loans or personal funds to keep the business going
- You can’t pay tax liabilities or superannuation when they fall due
You don’t need to wait until you’re certain the company is insolvent. The threshold is “suspicion”. If the warning signs are there, that’s the time to act.
Why does timing matter? Because safe harbour is about what you do from the point you suspect insolvency onwards. If you’ve been trading while clearly insolvent for months without taking any action, and then belatedly try to invoke safe harbour, a court is unlikely to be sympathetic.
Can you answer this question: “When did you first become concerned about the company’s solvency, and what did you do about it?”
If you can’t answer that clearly, you have a problem.
The sooner you identify financial distress and start documenting your response, the stronger your position. Waiting until the situation is dire significantly weakens your ability to rely on safe harbour later.
The eligibility conditions you must meet
Before you can rely on safe harbour, you need to meet three non-negotiable conditions. These are not optional. If you fail any one of them, you’re not eligible for safe harbour protection.
Paying employee entitlements
You must be substantially complying with your obligations to pay employee entitlements, including wages, superannuation, and any other entitlements under employment contracts or awards.
This is a strict requirement. Courts and liquidators have zero tolerance for directors who try to restructure on the backs of unpaid employees.
“Substantially complying” doesn’t mean perfection, but it means you’re meeting entitlements as they fall due, or if there are delays, they’re minor and you’re actively fixing them.
If you’re behind on superannuation or haven’t paid wages on time, you need to fix that before safe harbour is available.
Meeting tax reporting obligations
You must be meeting your tax reporting obligations. This means lodging Business Activity Statements, income tax returns, and other required reports with the Australian Taxation Office on time.
Note that this is about reporting, not necessarily paying all tax debts immediately. You can be in safe harbour even if you have outstanding tax liabilities, provided you’re keeping up with lodgements and engaging with the ATO about payment arrangements.
But if you’re not lodging at all, or you’re months behind, you’re not eligible for safe harbour.
Keeping proper books and records
You must be maintaining adequate books and records that correctly record and explain the company’s transactions and financial position.
This requirement is about more than compliance. It’s about being able to show later that you made informed decisions based on reliable financial information.
If your books are a mess, or you’re making decisions without knowing the company’s true financial position, safe harbour won’t protect you.
Can you produce up-to-date management accounts, cash flow forecasts, and a realistic balance sheet if someone asks for them tomorrow?
If you can’t, that’s a red flag.
Before you rely on safe harbour, audit your compliance with these three conditions. If any are deficient, fix them immediately. A liquidator will scrutinise these basics, and failure on any one of them can disqualify you from the defence entirely.
Developing a course of action that stands up to scrutiny
Meeting the eligibility conditions gets you through the door. But the core of safe harbour is whether you’re pursuing a course of action that’s reasonably likely to lead to a better outcome for the company than immediate administration or liquidation.
This is where safe harbour moves from compliance checklist to genuine business judgment. And it’s where most directors struggle.
What “better outcome” actually means
A better outcome doesn’t mean a perfect outcome. It means that if you pursue the plan you’re developing, the result for the company and its creditors is likely to be better than if you appointed an administrator or liquidator today.
Better might mean:
- A successful sale of the business as a going concern, preserving jobs and returning more to creditors than a fire sale would achieve
- A capital raising or refinancing that stabilises the business and allows it to trade out of difficulty
- A restructuring that reduces costs, exits loss-making operations, and returns the company to profitability
- A controlled wind-down that realises assets in an orderly way and maximises returns to creditors
The key is that you need a genuine basis for believing your plan has a reasonable prospect of success. You can’t just assert it. You need to be able to point to evidence: financial modelling, market feedback, expressions of interest from buyers or investors, expert advice.
If your plan is “let’s keep trading and hope things improve”, that’s not a course of action. That’s wishful thinking.
The role of independent advice
You don’t have to engage a formal restructuring adviser to rely on safe harbour. But in practice, independent advice significantly strengthens your position.
Why? Because if a liquidator challenges you later, one of the first questions will be: “What advice did you get, and from whom?”
If the answer is “I talked to my accountant and made my own judgment”, that might be enough if your accountant has genuine restructuring experience and you documented the advice thoroughly. But if your accountant is a generalist who’s never been involved in a turnaround, that’s a weak foundation.
Independent restructuring advice helps you in three ways:
- It gives you an objective assessment of whether your plan is realistic
- It provides evidence that you took the situation seriously and sought expert input
- It tests assumptions and identifies risks you might not have seen
Think of it this way: if you end up in court defending your decisions, do you want to say “I relied on my own judgment” or “I engaged a restructuring adviser with 20 years’ experience who assessed the plan and concluded it was viable”?
Courts assess “better outcome” objectively, not based on your optimism. You need evidence that a reasonable director, informed by proper advice, would have believed the plan had genuine prospects. That’s a factual, evidence-based assessment, not a hopeful one.
Documenting the plan and decision-making process
If safe harbour ever becomes relevant, it will be because someone is challenging your decisions after the fact. That means you need to be able to prove what you did, when, and why.
Documentation is your defence.
At a minimum, you should be creating and keeping:
- Board minutes recording the discussion of solvency concerns, the decision to pursue a restructuring plan, and regular reviews of progress against that plan
- Cash flow forecasts showing realistic projections of income, expenses, and funding needs over the restructuring period
- Scenario analysis considering different outcomes (successful sale, capital raising, wind-down) and assessing the likely returns to creditors under each scenario
- Advice letters from restructuring advisers, accountants, or lawyers documenting their assessment of the plan and its prospects
- Progress reports tracking whether the plan is being implemented, what’s working, what’s not, and how the strategy is being adjusted
The discipline of documenting these decisions has another benefit: it forces you to think clearly. If you can’t write down why you believe the plan is viable, that’s a sign you don’t actually have a defensible basis for continuing to trade.
Treat every board meeting during this period as if it will be read out in court. Because it might be. Clear, factual minutes that show careful consideration and genuine engagement with the issues will protect you. Vague, rushed, or absent records will destroy your credibility.
How safe harbour works if the business ultimately fails
One of the most common questions directors ask is: “If we try to restructure and it doesn’t work, does safe harbour still help us?”
The answer is yes, provided you met the conditions and pursued a genuine course of action.
Safe harbour doesn’t require success. It protects directors who make informed, reasonable decisions in difficult circumstances, even if the plan ultimately fails.
Imagine this scenario:
You’re a director of a manufacturing business that loses a major customer. Revenue drops sharply. You engage a restructuring adviser, develop a plan to cut costs, pursue new customers, and negotiate extended payment terms with key suppliers. You document everything. You meet employee and tax obligations. You review progress monthly.
After six months, it’s clear the plan isn’t working. Customer wins are slower than projected, and cash is running out. You make the decision to appoint voluntary administrators.
In that scenario, safe harbour should protect you from personal liability for debts incurred during the six-month restructuring period. Why? Because you took reasonable steps, based on proper advice, and the plan had genuine prospects at the time you pursued it.
Contrast that with a director who ignores warning signs, doesn’t seek advice, keeps trading without any real plan, and only appoints administrators when creditors force the issue. That director has no safe harbour protection.
The difference is not the outcome. It’s the process and the quality of decision-making.
Safe harbour is about defensible decision-making, not guaranteed success. If you can show you acted responsibly, took advice, and pursued a credible plan, the fact that the plan failed doesn’t disqualify you from the defence.
Common ways directors lose safe harbour protection
Even if you start in safe harbour, you can fall out of it. Understanding the common mistakes helps you avoid them.
Falling behind on employee entitlements or tax
If you were compliant when you started, but then stop paying superannuation or fall behind on tax lodgements, you lose eligibility.
This is a trap for directors who focus on keeping the business running but neglect compliance obligations. The ATO and Fair Work Ombudsman are often the last creditors to get paid, and that’s precisely what safe harbour is designed to prevent.
If cash is tight, you need to prioritise employee entitlements and tax reporting. Those are non-negotiable.
Abandoning the plan without good reason
Safe harbour protects you while you’re pursuing a course of action. If you stop pursuing that action, or drift into “wait and see” mode without actively working the plan, you’re no longer protected.
This doesn’t mean the plan can’t change. It means you need to be actively managing it, reviewing progress, and adjusting strategy as circumstances change.
If board minutes show months of inactivity, or you stop meeting with advisers, or you’re not tracking whether the plan is working, you’ve lost the protection.
Ignoring advice or acting recklessly
If you’ve engaged an adviser and they’re telling you the plan isn’t viable, you can’t just ignore that and keep going.
Safe harbour assumes you’re acting reasonably and responsibly. If you’re acting against clear advice, or taking reckless risks that advisers have warned you about, you’re not in safe harbour.
Making it personal
Safe harbour applies to each director individually based on their own conduct. If you’re the director who is actively engaged, seeking advice, and pushing for proper process, you’re in a much stronger position than a co-director who is absent, disengaged, or obstructing the restructuring.
If your board is divided, document your own actions clearly. Safe harbour can protect you even if other directors are not meeting the standard.
Safe harbour is not a static status. It’s something you maintain through ongoing compliance, active decision-making, and regular review. Treat it as a discipline, not a box you tick once and forget about.
Proving your decisions were defensible if a claim is made
If the company goes into liquidation, and a liquidator investigates whether you breached your duties by trading while insolvent, safe harbour becomes your defence.
At that point, the onus is on you to prove that you met the conditions and were pursuing a credible course of action.
What liquidators and courts look at
Liquidators are trained to be sceptical. They will scrutinise:
- When you first became aware of solvency concerns, and what you did about it
- Whether you were meeting employee entitlement and tax obligations during the relevant period
- The quality and independence of any advice you received
- Whether the restructuring plan was realistic, or just aspirational
- Whether you were actively implementing the plan, or just talking about it
- Whether you reviewed and adjusted the plan as circumstances changed
- The quality of your records and documentation
If your records are thin, or you can’t produce evidence of advice, or the plan was clearly unrealistic from the outset, you’ll struggle.
The practical importance of contemporaneous records
The single most important thing you can do to protect yourself is create contemporaneous records that document your thinking and actions in real time.
“Contemporaneous” means created at the time, not reconstructed later. Courts give much more weight to board minutes written during a meeting than to a narrative you draft six months later trying to explain what you were thinking.
What should those records show?
- That you identified solvency concerns early and took them seriously
- That you sought and considered advice from qualified advisers
- That you assessed the company’s financial position based on reliable information
- That you developed a realistic plan with clear milestones and success criteria
- That you reviewed progress regularly and adjusted the plan as needed
- That you met your compliance obligations throughout
If you can point to a clear trail of board minutes, advice letters, cash flow models, and progress reports, you’re in a strong position. If you can’t, you’re vulnerable.
In litigation, the quality of your evidence matters as much as the quality of your decisions. Even if you acted responsibly, if you can’t prove it, you’re at risk. Documentation is not just good governance, it’s your insurance policy.
Practical next steps if you’re worried about insolvent trading
If you’re reading this and thinking “This sounds like my situation”, here’s what to do.
Step one: assess solvency honestly
Sit down with your CFO, accountant, or financial controller and get a clear picture of the company’s financial position. Can the company pay its debts as and when they fall due? If the answer is no, or you’re not sure, you need to act.
Step two: check your compliance
Are you up to date with employee entitlements, including superannuation? Are you lodging tax reports on time? Are your books and records accurate and current?
If the answer to any of these is no, fix it immediately. These are the minimum conditions for safe harbour, and they’re also just basic director obligations.
Step three: get advice
Talk to a restructuring adviser or a lawyer with experience in insolvency and director duties. You need an objective assessment of whether the company can be turned around, and what a credible restructuring plan would look like.
Don’t rely solely on internal optimism or your existing accountant if they don’t have restructuring experience. You need someone who’s been through this before and can give you a realistic view.
Step four: document everything
From this point forward, treat every board discussion, every decision, and every piece of advice as if it will be scrutinised later. Create clear board minutes. Keep advice letters. Document your reasoning.
If you’re having difficult conversations with lenders, suppliers, or investors, follow up in writing to confirm what was discussed and agreed.
Step five: review and adjust regularly
A restructuring plan isn’t something you set and forget. You need to review progress against milestones, test whether assumptions are still valid, and adjust strategy as circumstances change.
If the plan isn’t working, be prepared to pivot. That might mean changing the plan, or it might mean accepting that the best outcome now is a formal appointment.
Safe harbour protects directors who make hard calls based on the best information available at the time. It doesn’t protect directors who cling to failed plans out of hope or fear.
If you’re worried about insolvent trading, the worst thing you can do is nothing. Inaction doesn’t protect you. Taking steps, getting advice, and documenting your decisions does. Even if the business ultimately fails, you’ll be in a much stronger position if you acted early and responsibly.
When to pivot from turnaround to formal appointment
One of the hardest judgments directors face is knowing when to stop trying to save the business and make a formal appointment.
Safe harbour doesn’t require you to keep trying indefinitely. If the plan isn’t working, and the prospects of a better outcome are fading, continuing to trade can shift from defensible restructuring to reckless insolvent trading.
Warning signs that it’s time to pivot include:
- Cash flow projections show the company will run out of money before the plan can deliver results
- Key assumptions underlying the plan (customer wins, funding commitments, cost reductions) haven’t materialised and are unlikely to
- Advisers are telling you the plan is no longer viable
- Creditor pressure is intensifying to the point where the company can’t function
- You’re falling behind on employee entitlements or tax obligations despite your best efforts
At that point, the better outcome for creditors is likely to be a formal appointment. That might be voluntary administration, where an administrator takes control and explores restructuring options, or it might be liquidation.
Making that call is not a failure. It’s a recognition that the circumstances have changed, and continuing to trade would now be irresponsible.
If you reach that point, safe harbour should still protect you for the period when the plan was viable. What matters is that you acted reasonably based on the information you had at the time, and you adjusted your approach when it became clear the plan wasn’t working.
Safe harbour is not about clinging to hope at all costs. It’s about making informed, defensible decisions and adjusting strategy when circumstances change. Knowing when to stop is as important as knowing when to start.
Individual director protection when boards are divided
Safe harbour applies to each director individually, based on their own conduct and decision-making. This matters when boards are divided on strategy.
Imagine you’re a director who believes the company should appoint administrators, but other directors are pushing to keep trading. Or the reverse: you believe there’s a credible restructuring path, but other directors are panicking and want to shut down immediately.
In that situation, what you do personally matters. If you’re:
- Attending board meetings and raising concerns clearly
- Pushing for proper advice and compliance with employee and tax obligations
- Documenting your views and the reasons for them
- Acting in good faith and in the best interests of the company
then you’re in a much stronger position than a director who is absent, disengaged, or simply going along with the majority without questioning it.
If the company ultimately fails and a liquidator investigates, they will assess each director’s conduct separately. The director who actively tried to do the right thing, even if outvoted, is in a different position from the director who rubber-stamped bad decisions or ignored warning signs.
This is why documentation of your individual actions is so important. Board minutes should record who said what, who raised concerns, and how decisions were made. If you disagreed with a decision, make sure that’s recorded.
If you’re the dissenting director, don’t just complain at board meetings. Document your concerns in writing, seek your own legal advice if necessary, and consider whether you need to resign if other directors are acting recklessly. Safe harbour protects responsible decision-making, but it won’t help you if you stay silent and let bad decisions happen.
Safe harbour in the context of personal guarantees and secured creditors
Directors often ask: “If I’m in safe harbour, does that protect me from personal guarantees?”
No. Safe harbour only protects you from personal liability for insolvent trading. It does not affect personal guarantees you’ve given to banks, landlords, or suppliers.
If the company defaults on obligations you’ve guaranteed, the creditor can still pursue you personally, regardless of whether you were in safe harbour.
Similarly, safe harbour doesn’t change the rights of secured creditors. If a bank has security over company assets and the company defaults, the bank can enforce its security regardless of whether directors were pursuing a restructuring plan.
This is why safe harbour needs to be part of a broader risk management strategy, not relied on in isolation. You need to think about:
- What personal exposure you have through guarantees, and whether you can negotiate releases or limits as part of a restructuring
- How secured creditors will respond to a restructuring plan, and whether they’ll support it or enforce their security
- What other director risks exist (phoenixing allegations, preference claims, uncommercial transactions) and how you’re managing those
Safe harbour is a powerful tool, but it’s not a magic shield. You still need to manage your overall risk position carefully.
Safe harbour protects you from one specific liability (insolvent trading claims). It doesn’t eliminate all director risks. You need proper legal advice on your full exposure, not just whether you’re eligible for safe harbour.
The evidentiary burden and what courts expect
If you end up in court defending an insolvent trading claim and relying on safe harbour, the burden of proof is on you.
That means you need to prove:
- That you met the eligibility conditions (employee entitlements, tax reporting, proper records) during the relevant period
- That you were developing or pursuing a course of action
- That the course of action was reasonably likely to lead to a better outcome for the company than immediate administration or liquidation
- That debts incurred during the safe harbour period were directly or indirectly connected to that course of action
Courts assess this objectively. They will look at whether a reasonable director, in your position, with the information available at the time, would have believed the plan was viable.
They will not give you credit for good intentions if the plan was clearly unrealistic. And they will not accept vague, aspirational plans with no real substance.
What courts look for:
- Clear identification of the problem: Did you understand the company’s financial position and the nature of the distress?
- A structured response: Did you develop a plan with clear steps, milestones, and success criteria?
- Informed decision-making: Did you seek and consider advice from people with relevant expertise?
- Active implementation: Did you actually work the plan, or just talk about it?
- Regular review: Did you monitor progress and adjust strategy as circumstances changed?
- Good faith and proper purpose: Were you genuinely trying to achieve a better outcome, or just delaying the inevitable to benefit yourself?
If your evidence shows those elements, you have a strong case. If it doesn’t, safe harbour won’t help you.
Think of safe harbour litigation as a reconstruction of your decision-making process. The judge will be asking: “Were these decisions reasonable, based on the information this director had at the time?” Your job is to provide the evidence that answers “yes”. Without that evidence, you lose.
Comparing informal restructure under safe harbour with formal appointments
Directors often wonder whether they should pursue an informal restructure under safe harbour, or make a formal appointment (voluntary administration or liquidation) straight away.
There’s no one-size-fits-all answer. It depends on the company’s circumstances, the quality of the restructuring plan, and the risks involved.
When informal restructure under safe harbour makes sense
Safe harbour allows you to pursue restructuring options while retaining control of the company. This can be valuable if:
- There’s a genuine prospect of a successful sale, refinancing, or turnaround
- The company needs time to realise assets in an orderly way, rather than a fire sale
- Key customers or suppliers will walk away if a formal appointment is made, but will stay if the company remains under director control
- There’s a credible capital injection or investor support that’s close to finalising
In those situations, safe harbour gives you the legal protection to pursue the plan without being paralysed by insolvent trading risk.
When formal appointment is the better path
But sometimes a formal appointment is the right call from the start. That’s often the case if:
- The company is clearly insolvent with no realistic prospect of recovery
- Creditor pressure is so intense that the company can’t function
- There are complex disputes, potential claims, or legal risks that require independent investigation
- Directors are conflicted or compromised, and an independent administrator can make better decisions
- The company needs the protection of a moratorium on creditor actions while options are explored
Voluntary administration, in particular, gives the company breathing space through a statutory moratorium, allows an independent administrator to assess options, and provides a structured process for creditors to vote on a Deed of Company Arrangement if restructuring is viable.
The key is to make the call based on a realistic assessment of the company’s position, not based on fear, ego, or reluctance to let go.
Safe harbour enables informal restructure, but it doesn’t make informal restructure the right choice in every case. Sometimes the best outcome for creditors is a formal appointment from the outset. The judgment call is whether there’s genuine value in retaining director control, or whether an independent appointment will achieve a better result.
Final thoughts: safe harbour as a framework for defensible decisions
Safe harbour is not a loophole. It’s not a way to trade recklessly and avoid consequences.
It’s a framework that allows directors to make difficult decisions in difficult circumstances, provided they do so responsibly, based on proper advice, and with genuine regard for the interests of creditors.
If you’re facing financial distress, safe harbour gives you options. But only if you use it properly.
That means:
- Acting early, when you first suspect solvency concerns
- Meeting your compliance obligations rigorously
- Seeking independent, expert advice
- Developing a realistic plan with clear milestones
- Documenting everything as you go
- Reviewing progress honestly and adjusting strategy when needed
If you do those things, safe harbour will protect you even if the plan ultimately fails. If you don’t, you’re exposed.
The right approach depends on your specific circumstances, the quality of your plan, and the strength of your evidence. But one thing is clear: inaction is not a strategy. The longer you wait, the fewer options you have, and the weaker your position becomes.
If you’re worried about insolvent trading, the time to act is now. Get advice, assess your position honestly, and make a plan. Safe harbour is there to protect directors who do the right thing, even when it’s hard.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Safe harbour is a complex area of law that depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances of each case. If you’re concerned about insolvent trading or director liability, you should seek tailored legal advice based on your situation. Aptum Legal specialises in commercial and tax disputes, including defending directors against insolvent trading claims and advising on risk management in financial distress. Contact us for a confidential discussion.
