Just in time for Chinese New Year, a Hong Kong court has taken a major step forward in the developing law on cross-border insolvency by recognising a mainland Chinese liquidation for the first time. InJoint and Several Liquidators of CEFC Shanghai International Group Ltd [2020] HKCFI 167, Mr Justice Harris granted recognition and assistance to mainland administrators in Hong Kong so they could perform their functions and protect assets held in Hong Kong from enforcement.

Location:

Da Yu Financial Holdings Limited (formerly known as China Agrotech Holdings Limited) (in liquidation) [2019] HKCFI 2531 (date of judgment 17 October 2019)

Location:

大禹金融控股有限公司(前称为China Agrotech Holdings Limited浩伦农业科技集团有限公司)(清盘中) [2019] HKCFI 2531 (判决日期2019年10月17日)

这是一宗关于对香港上市的离岸公司进行债务重组中获准并存债务偿还计划的案件。在债务偿还计划中,重组成本通常数额巨大,直接影响对计划债权人的回报。本案中,香港法院对使用并存债务偿还计划,以及重组成本和债权人回报之间的关系,提出了富有远见的意见。

背景情况

大禹金融控股有限公司(前称为China Agrotech Holdings Limited浩伦农业科技集团有限公司)(清盘中)(下称“公司”)成立于开曼群岛,并于香港联交所上市。公司自2015年初开始清盘,其上市状态是公司的唯一重大资产。公司大部分的债务均受香港法管辖。

清算人已找到了一名白衣骑士,以进行债务重组和恢复公司股份的交易。拟议重组计划涉及对公司股本的重构和向投资者发行新股,收益将用于支付收购新业务的费用、公司重组费用和部分解除公司负债。债权人回报率约为4.28%,在开曼群岛和香港开展并存债务偿还计划,预期实现债务重组。

Location:

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

Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary Paul Chan said last week that there were plans to introduce a bill this year into the city’s Legislative Council to put in place a long-awaited and much needed corporate rescue procedure for Hong Kong.

Authors:

Hong Kong’s restructuring scene is one of the most cross-border in the world, with three-quarters of its listed companies incorporated offshore and most restructurings having a mainland China connection. But the territory still lacks a statutory regime for cross-border recognition – as recently brought into focus in the restructuring of Singaporean engineering company CW Group. What does this mean for international insolvencies in the region?

INTRODUCTION

The use of trusts for asset protection purposes is well established and – in principle – not improper. However, recent history has seen increasing attempts by creditors to have transfers of assets unwound. A recent UK Supreme Court case saw the Court effectively achieve this by way of a resulting trust finding.1 This article considers the issue from a different angle: insolvency legislation.

ISSUE FOUR 2017 FUNDING IN FOCUS Are Asian arbitral centres going to surpass the old continent? PwC Damages: an expert’s view Who wins, where and why? Stockholm, Sweden, Scandinavia Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 60 seconds Q&A with Erin Miller Rankin Brick Court Chambers Competition damages litigation in London pre- and post- Brexit Wilberforce Chambers Getting at trust assets and piercing the corporate veil Disputes funding for corporates CONTENTS Are Asian arbitral centres going to surpass the old continent?