In Harrington v. Purdue Pharma LP, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the Bankruptcy Code does not authorize bankruptcy courts to confirm a Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan that discharges creditors’ claims against third parties without the consent of the affected claimants. The decision rejects the bankruptcy plan of Purdue Pharma, which had released members of the Sackler family from liability for their role in the opioid crisis. Justice Gorsuch wrote the majority decision. Justice Kavanaugh dissented, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kagan and Sotomayor.

In a recent landmark case, the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong (CFA) clarified its approach to bankruptcy proceedings where the disputed petition debt arises from a contract with an exclusive jurisdiction clause (EJC) favouring a foreign court.

Background

The bankruptcy proceedings related to a disputed debt due under a credit agreement with an EJC favouring New York. The Hong Kong Court of Appeal (CA) upheld the EJC, setting aside the bankruptcy order to allow the dispute to be determined under the agreed jurisdiction. The applicant appealed to the CFA.

Re Gatecoin Limited (Gatecoin) is a landmark decision concerning the winding-up of a cryptocurrency exchange.

Background

Liquidators secured over 50 types of cryptocurrencies with an aggregate value of over HK$140m. To aid the liquidator’s allocation of the seized cryptocurrencies, the Court of First Instance decided two key issues.

Decision

The court held that:

On 9 December 2022, in the first restructuring to be implemented by way of a parallel and overlapping Hong Kong scheme and English restructuring plan, the English High Court approved a restructuring plan proposed by Hong Kong Airlines Limited (Hong Kong Airlines). The High Court of Hong Kong followed suit on 14 December 2022 and approved a scheme of arrangement on broadly the same terms.

The approved restructuring has saved Hong Kong Airlines from imminent liquidation and aims to secure its continued existence as a going concern.

Background

Introduction

What happens when a shady businessman transfers $1 million from one floundering car dealership to another via the bank account of an innocent immigrant? Will the first dealership’s future chapter 7 trustee be allowed to recover from the naïve newcomer as the “initial transferee” of a fraudulent transfer as per the strict letter of the law? Or will our brave courts of equity exercise their powers to prevent a most grave injustice?

A foreign (non-U.S.) company can be dragged unwillingly into a U.S. bankruptcy case if the bankruptcy court has “personal jurisdiction” over the company.

A foreign (non-U.S.) company can be dragged unwillingly into a U.S. bankruptcy case if the bankruptcy court has “personal jurisdiction” over the company.

The issue of whether directors, officers, and/or shareholders breached their fiduciary duties to a company prior to bankruptcy is commonly litigated in chapter 11 cases, as creditors look to additional sources for recovery, such as D&O insurance or “deep-pocket” shareholders, including private equity firms. The recent decision in In re AMC Investors, LLC, 637 B.R. 43 (Bankr. D. Del. 2022) provides a helpful reminder of the importance of timing in bringing such claims and the use by defendants of affirmative defenses to defeat those claims.

On 18 January 2022, Hong Kong-listed cruise operator Genting Hong Kong Limited ('Genting HK') filed for provisional liquidation with the Supreme Court of Bermuda after it failed to secure access to liquidity. Genting HK has since gone into liquidation.

Background