Introduction
Introduction
A. Introduction
The Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (“Model Law”) was adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNICITRAL) in 1997. It was designed to assist countries in equipping their insolvency laws with a modernised and harmonised legal framework to effectively address cross-border insolvency and restructuring cases.
Introduction
The Cross-Border Insolvency Bill 2025 ("Bill") passed its first reading on 28 July 2025 in the Dewan Rakyat. The Bill has since passed its second and third reading in the Dewan Rakyat on 29 July 2025. The legislation aims to align Malaysia with the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency ("Model Law"), establishing a clear legal framework for managing multi-jurisdictional corporate insolvency cases.
Background and Legislative Intent
Introduction
An amalgamation or reconstruction of companies under sections 366 and 370 of the Companies Act 2016 ("CA 2016") is a common tool for corporate restructuring in Malaysia. It enables the seamless transfer of assets and liabilities from the transferor to the transferee, typically within group structures where both companies share a common ultimate holding company.
Background
Introduction and Brief Facts
The Kuala Lumpur High Court recently dismissed an application for a judicial management order and in its decision introduced procedural safeguards to prevent the abuse of the judicial management process.
A distressed merger and acquisition (“M&A”) is essentially a sub-category of a conventional M&A, which involves sales of shares or assets of companies that are in financial turmoil and these companies are being placed under administration, receivership and/or liquidation. Due to the unprecedented Covid-19 pandemic, distressed M&A transactions have become more common in recent years with companies in financial and operational distress looking to dispose of their assets to better manage high illiquidity as well as reducing over-indebtedness risk.
On 9 July 2024, the Federal Court in Abdul Rashid Mohamad Isa v PTT International Trading Pte Ltd [2024] 5 MLRA 603 (“Abdul Rashid”), with a panel comprising Nallini Pathmanathan FCJ, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim FCJ and Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil FCJ, held inter alia that a Creditor’s Petition could be withdrawn without the consequences of bringing the entire bankruptcy proceedings to an end. Hurry Up
Rabindra S Nathan, Shearn Delamore & Co
This is an extract from the 2025 edition of GRR's The Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
This is an Insight article, written by a selected partner as part of GRR's co-published content. Read more on Insight