As the number of enterprise groups in China has increased, the phenomenon of affiliates jointly going into bankruptcy has also become more common. Once a member of an enterprise group enters a bankruptcy procedure, whether its affiliates will also simultaneously enter the procedure with it has consistently been an issue of concern to creditors.
The number of substantive consolidation bankruptcy cases of affiliated enterprises in mainland China has gradually increased since 2014. Substantive consolidation bankruptcy means disregarding the independent corporate personality of all affiliated members and treating them as the same enterprise in bankruptcy treatment, so as to pay off debts to creditors in a fair manner, regarding an affiliated enterprise bankruptcy case with significant corporate personality confusion.
In our work with international companies supplying goods to the UK, we see the same issues arising regularly. In Part 3, we examined the types of insolvency process a customer may be subject to. In this fourth of five articles based on the five elements of the Wu Xing, we take the theme of Fire and explain the significant powers that arise for the insolvency practitioner on the entry into insolvency: to investigate propriety and recover assets to the central pool to pay creditors.
Fire: the great powers of the insolvency practitioner regarding transactions defrauding creditors
The Singapore Court may grant freezing injunctions in aid of foreign court proceedings, but the Court must have jurisdiction over the defendant, and a substantive claim must nevertheless be brought against the defendant in Singapore
In Bi Xiaoqiong v China Medical Technologies, Inc (in liquidation) and
another [2019] SGCA 50 (“China Medicalâ€), the Singapore Court of Appeal
(“CoAâ€) confirmed that the Singapore Court may grant freezing (or Mareva)
injunctions in support of foreign court proceedings. However, the Singapore
2019年6月17日,中央国债登记结算有限责任公司(以下简称“中央结算公司”)发布《中央结算公司担保品违约处置业务指引(试行)》,银行间市场清算所股份有限公司(以下简称“上海清算所”)发布《银行间市场清算所股份有限公司债券回购违约处置业务实施细则(试行)》和《银行间市场清算所股份有限公司回购债券拍卖处置业务实施细则(试行)》,以及全国银行间同业拆借中心(以下简称“同业拆借中心”)发布《全国银行间同业拆借中心回购违约处置实施细则(试行)》(前述文件以下统称为“违约处置新规”,三家机构统称为“处置机构”),共同构建及明确银行间债券市场的债券违约处置新制度,开创银行间债券市场债券快速处置新阶段。
处置新规的发布,立即引发了境内外市场参与者的密切关注以及对相关问题的深入探讨。6月20日,中央结算公司及同业拆借中心也分别通过中国债券信息网(www.chinabond.com.cn)和微信公众号“CfetsOnline发布” 进一步发布了关于违约处置新规的答疑。
基于对违约处置新规的解读以及我们与相关市场参与者的讨论,我们拟通过本文做一些初步梳理、探讨和展望。
(12) 信托计划中受托人对股权投资应当如何进行管理?
实践中,信托计划受托人取得股权主要基于两种情形,一是基于受托而取得股权,即委托人将自己合法持有的股权作为信托财产,转移至受托人管理和处分;二是基于投资而取得股权,即委托人先把自己合法持有的信托资金或其他财产转移至受托人,进而由受托人通过管理、运用该等受托财产,以增资、受让等方式投资取得股权并对该等股权进行管理和处分。
基于受托人取得股权的不同情形,受托人对股权投资的管理责任不完全相同。
如受托人系基于受托取得股权,受托人的股东身份更接近“名义股东”,其对投资股权的管理主要受限于信托合同约定的信托财产的运用及管理方式。
近年来,我国宏观经济增长放缓,国家调整产业和信贷政策,并逐渐加强金融监管,商业银行的资产质量压力有所增加,十亿甚至百亿级别的债务逾期或潜在违约浮出水面。这些巨无霸级别的潜在不良贷款风险,迫切要求商业银行审查并改善贷前贷后管理中的遗漏和问题,也对商业银行的危机处理能力提出了更高的挑战。
大敌当前,痛定思痛,当危机来临时,商业银行的管理层和执行层需要的是冷静的思考、周密的策划,以及必要时刻壮士断腕的决策力。从本团队近期参与处理的几项复杂的债务逾期及潜在违约案例来看,危机的表象多种多样,除了资金周转困难带来直接的偿付危机;有的则是债务人控制人挪用公司资金投入股市炒股,有的是公司实际控制人陷入刑事调查和指控,也有的则更为隐蔽,债务人关联主体在境外受到他国政府的调查等等。这些危机虽然不一定直接表现为到期不付,但可能已经导致债务人违反融资文件的陈述、承诺条款,甚至通过交叉违约触发了违约事件或潜在违约事件。
本文旨在梳理危机处理的思路,通盘策划全面追索资产的策略,为贷款管理工作层面制定一份简介易行的“工作方案”,以便为后续的债务重组和清偿争取宝贵的时间,避免弯路:
一、梳理融资文件
As the Chinese economy enters the “new normal”, the Chinese government has been adjusting its industrial and credit-related policies and strengthening regulation of Chinese financial institutions. A large number of non-performing loans (NPLs) as well as actual loan defaults have started to surface. The risks associated with rising levels of NPLs require Chinese banks to enhance their ex ante and ex post credit risk management practices.
Restructuring & Insolvency Asia Pacific Introduction The bankruptcy regime was a major milestone for China. For the first time in its history, China now has a unified and comprehensive bankruptcy system covering all types of enterprises, including foreign investment vehicles and state-owned enterprises.
Investors in non-performing loans ("NPLs") continue to look for new jurisdictions and opportunities to achieve attractive returns on capital. Much of the European NPL market is now in a relatively advanced state (particularly in the more mature parts of the market such as UK, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain and, to a lesser extent, Italy). Funds are, therefore, looking further afield for NPL opportunities. One interesting jurisdiction, given the 1.71 trillion yuan (c.US $270 billion) of NPLs held by commercial banks, is China.