Cases involving the application of the Council Regulation (EC) No. 1346 / 2000 (the ‘Regulation’) have been rare before the Maltese Courts since Malta joined the European Union in May 2004. Thus far, the only instance where an issue involving the interpretation of the Regulation arose involved a maritime case – The Foreign Economic Technical Co. Operative Company of China et vs m.v.

Cross-border insolvency law has been gaining importance in the EU’s legal system over the past few decades. Harmonising insolvency laws is a difficult process as the legal framework interacts with a myriad of domestic laws. In order to increase the effectiveness of cross-border insolvency proceedings, the original Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings was replaced by new Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 the Insolvency Proceedings (Recast) Regulation (the “Recast”).

In January 2014, the Malta Financial Services Authority (“MFSA”) announced that Setanta Insurance Company Limited (“Setanta Insurance”) had ceased carrying on insurance business. As a result, no new business or renewals would be issued by the company, although existing policies would remain in force. 

In 2010 Malta embarked on an ambitious project to introduce the Aircraft Registration Act (the “ARA”) and to accede to the Cape Town Convention and its Aircraft Protocol. A few years later, the growing presence of AOC holders in Malta and the increase in aircraft registered in the National Aircraft Register is testament to the success story of the ARA.

This notwithstanding, there still is and will always be room for improvement, as shown by the recent Act to amend the ARA which became law in October 20161. The improvements affect four broad categories:

Any lending of funds needs to be adequately secured. This is a practice which every lender knows and should observe in order to adequately protect his credit. However, the meaning of "adequate security" is not straight forward and lenders must be careful when selecting their preferred security 

There are various winding up procedures to which a Maltese-registered company may be subjected in terms of Maltese law. Amongst the said modes of action is what is known as the members’ voluntary winding up. This refers to the solvent voluntary liquidation of a company and specifically necessitates that the company in questionwill be able to pay off its debts in full within a period not exceeding12 months from the proposed date of dissolution.

General

The novel coronavirus has brought about many unforeseen circumstances which have unfortunately led many businesses to end in difficult financial situations. According to the Maltese Companies Act (Cap. 386 of the Laws of Malta), a company which is presently unable to pay its debts, or is very likely that it will be unable to pay its debts in the near future, has the possibility to either dissolve and consequently wind-up the company or recover the company.

Offshore security enforcement Offshore security enforcement /3 Contents 4 Introduction 5 British Virgin Islands (BVI) 8 Cayman Islands 11 Isle of Man 14 Guernsey 18 Jersey 21 Luxembourg 24 Malta 27 Mauritius 30 About us 31 Key contacts Offshore security enforcement 4\ Introduction This briefing document summarises the key issues in enforcing security in the countries listed and is a general guide. Taylor Wessing does not have offices in the jurisdictions contained in this guide, but has called on the support of the firms acknowledged at the back.

In East-West Logistics LLP v Melars Group Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1419 the Court of Appeal once again considered the test for establishing the location of a debtor's centre of main interests (COMI) for the purposes of the Recast Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings 2015/848. The case was a second appeal considering whether to uphold the dismissal of a winding up order on the grounds that the debtor's COMI was not in the United Kingdom.