In this article, Jose Maurellet SC and Michael Lok consider a recent judgment by Aedit Abdullah J of the Singapore High Court exploring issues arising out of the Model Law, including how and when the presumptive COMI may be displaced and whether a publicly held real estate investment trust falls within the scope of COMI.
Introduction
Under the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018, the Court may order the winding up of a company on a number of grounds, including where the company is unable to pay its debts. In Energy Resource Investment Pte Ltd v International Golf Resorts Pte Ltd [2022] SGHC 134, the Singapore High Court was faced with such a winding up application, and set out the relevant considerations for establishing insolvency on this ground, as well as how such insolvency may be refuted.
Global Perspectives on Insolvency, Restructuring & Dispute Resolution
As primarily offshore lawyers, we speak on a daily basis with onshore counsel, banks, asset managers, trustees, corporates, insolvency practitioners and individuals around the world. Those conversations give our Global Insolvency & Dispute Resolution Practice Group a unique perspective on the different market trends and their regional impact in 2022.
In a recent judgment1, the Singapore High Court allowed the liquidator of insolvent Castlewood Group to enter into a litigation funding arrang
On 26 April 2022, Chief Justice Smellie QC in Re Premier Assurance Group SPC Ltd. (in Official Liquidation) sanctioned a decision by the joint official liquidators (“JOLs”) of Premier Assurance Group SPC Ltd (in Official Liquidation) (the “Company”) to return (or procure the return of) certain payments held by or on behalf of the Company referable to one of its segregated portfolios, Premier Assurance Segregated Portfolio (“PASP”), to the respective payors on the basis that such sums were paid by mistake.
１．はじめに
シンガポールの倒産・清算手続については、本News Letterの2020年2月号（第20号）にてシンガポールの会社の 清算手続をご紹介しましたが1 、本号では、シンガポールにお ける外国倒産手続の承認援助手続について、ご紹介しま す。
２．承認援助手続
ある会社につき日本で倒産手続が開始し、その会社が外 国に財産を有している場合、その外国財産は、日本に所在 する財産と同様に、日本の倒産手続により保全されるでしょう か。
日本の破産法、民事再生法及び会社更生法上は、破産管 財人、再生債務者及び更生管財人（以下、総称して「管財人 等」といいます。）の財産管理処分権は外国に所在する財産 にも及ぶとされており（普及主義）、外国財産についても債権 者による個別的権利行使は制限されることになります。
Decided on 18 January 2022| Supreme Court of India
Introduction
Lock-up agreements typically involve the company's creditors committing in advance to vote at the relevant class meeting in favour of the contemplated scheme. Lock-up agreements serve an important commercial purpose of either securing support or giving an indicator as to likely support for the scheme before the parties incur the time and expense in finalising the negotiation process of the scheme.
Introduction
The success of a scheme of arrangement in restructuring depends largely on the consent of the requisite statutory majority of the scheme creditors. To incentivise the creditors to commit to the proposal at an early stage, scheme companies may seek to enter into a lock-up agreement with the creditor, in which the creditor provides an undertaking to vote in favour of the scheme in exchange for certain benefits, such as consent fees.