Yeah, that's how I used to read it too. If you think about it...

Yeah, that's how I used to read it too. If you think about it though, the ASX would not let this company trade if it was insolvent and the release was obviously seen by the ASX given they published it.

The lawyers make this stuff clear as mud.

"Case law has provided that the conclusion of insolvency should be established from a thorough consideration of the debtor’s financial position in its entirety and ought not to be drawn simply from evidence of a temporary lack of liquidity. It should be the debtor’s inability, utilising such cash resources as it has or can command through the use of its assets, to meet his debts as they fall due which indicates insolvency (refer to the case of Sandell v Porter (1966)).

A temporary lack of liquidity must be distinguished from an endemic shortage of working capital. In the case of ASIC v Plymin (2003), Mandie J of the Victorian Supreme Court listed fourteen indicators of insolvency that should be implemented as a beacon to any company that may be looking down the tunnel of insolvency as opposed to merely trading through a temporary phase of illiquidity (although not all of these indicators need to be present for a company to be insolvent). "

Source: http://rcrlaw.com.au/publications/definition-of-corporate-insolvency/