Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions demonstrate that the corporate attribution doctrine is not a one-size-fits-all approach.
The Singapore International Commercial Court (the "SICC"), a division of the General Division of the High Court and part of the Supreme Court of Singapore, was established in 2015 as a trusted neutral forum to meet increasing demand for effective transnational dispute resolution. It recently considered, as a matter of first impression for the SICC, whether to approve a prepackaged scheme of arrangement for a group of Vietnam-based real estate investment companies under Singapore's recently enacted Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 (the "IRDA").
As the enactment of chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code approaches its 20-year anniversary, U.S. bankruptcy courts are still grappling with some unresolved issues concerning how its provisions should be applied to best harmonize cross-border bankruptcy cases. One of those issues was the subject of a bench ruling handed down by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.
Courts disagree over whether a foreign bankruptcy case can be recognized under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code if the foreign debtor does not reside or have assets or a place of business in the United States. In 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit staked out its position on this issue in Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. Barnet (In re Barnet), 737 F.3d 238 (2d Cir. 2013), ruling that the provision of the Bankruptcy Code requiring U.S. residency, assets, or a place of business applies in chapter 15 cases as well as cases filed under other chapters.
The Bankruptcy Code bars certain individuals or entities from filing for bankruptcy protection, generally because they do not reside or have a place of business or property in the United States, fail to satisfy certain debt thresholds, or are business entities, such as banks and insurance companies, subject to non-bankruptcy rules or regulations governing their rehabilitation or liquidation.
Determining a foreign debtor's "center of main interests" ("COMI") for purposes of recognizing a foreign bankruptcy proceeding in the United States under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code can be problematic in cases involving multiple debtors that are members of an enterprise group doing business in several different countries. The U.S.
"Comity" is a principle of jurisprudence whereby, under appropriate circumstances, one country recognizes within its borders the legislative, executive, or judicial acts of another nation. Many recent court rulings have examined the indispensable role of comity in the context of foreign bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings that have been "recognized" by U.S. courts during the two decades since the enactment of chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code. However, U.S.
引言
近期,香港高等法院正式颁布针对一家大型港股公司(“港股公司”)的清盘令并委任清盘人。这宗债项涉及约数十亿美元的清盘呈请终于落下帷幕,也成为香港有史以来涉及金额最大的清盘案件之一。不少客户均希望了解,香港法下这类清盘对债权人利益及权利之影响。我们将持续推出系列文章,为大家介绍有关内容。
案情简介
根据香港公司清盘法律规定,公司任何一位债权人、股东或公司本身均可通过向高等法院提交清盘呈请书发起针对该公司的强制清盘。就该案而言,数月前港股公司的一债权人入禀香港高等法院,对港股公司提起清盘呈请(“呈请”)。该清盘呈请提出后,历经多次聆讯及延期申请,香港高等法院最终针对港股公司颁布了清盘令。
债权人对清盘债务人的行动
一旦公司进入强制清盘程序,根据香港公司清盘法律规定,所有针对该公司的诉讼程序均会自动中止。该规定目的在于确保清盘程序的有序进行,公司资产不会被用于提起或辩护任何法律程序,以保护公司财产和债权人利益。
引言
近期,香港高等法院正式颁布针对一家大型港股公司(“港股公司”)的清盘令并委任清盘人。这宗债项涉及约数十亿美元的清盘呈请终于落下帷幕,也成为香港有史以来涉及金额最大的清盘案件之一。不少客户均希望了解,香港法下这类清盘对债权人利益及权利之影响。我们将持续推出系列文章,为大家介绍有关内容。
案情简介
根据香港公司清盘法律规定,公司任何一位债权人、股东或公司本身均可通过向高等法院提交清盘呈请书发起针对该公司的强制清盘。就该案而言,数月前港股公司的一债权人入禀香港高等法院,对港股公司提起清盘呈请(“呈请”)。该清盘呈请提出后,历经多次聆讯及延期申请,香港高等法院最终针对港股公司颁布了清盘令。
债权人对清盘债务人的行动
一旦公司进入强制清盘程序,根据香港公司清盘法律规定,所有针对该公司的诉讼程序均会自动中止。该规定目的在于确保清盘程序的有序进行,公司资产不会被用于提起或辩护任何法律程序,以保护公司财产和债权人利益。
The Singapore International Commercial Court ("SICC") has handed down its first insolvency-related ruling. The court granted recognition and full force and effect to Indonesia's flagship airline's restructuring plan. That plan had been approved in accordance with Indonesian law. In granting recognition to the Indonesian plan under Singapore's version of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, the SICC overruled objections to recognition from aircraft lessors.