Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions demonstrate that the corporate attribution doctrine is not a one-size-fits-all approach.

The opening of safeguard or reorganisation proceedings does not automatically terminate a current agreement notwithstanding any contractual clause providing for termination.

Termination by a lessor

Court approval of a sale process in receivership or Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) proposal proceedings is generally a procedural order and objectors do not have an appeal as of right; they must seek leave and meet a high test in order obtain it. However, in Peakhill Capital Inc. v.

The Court of Cassation has considered whether company insolvency proceedings may be extended to a managing director and shareholder who has made payments to himself from the company's bank account.

Background

On 16 September 2021, ordinance 2021-1193 implemented the European Directive on preventive restructuring frameworks into French law. The Ordinance applies to proceedings opened from 1 October 2021.

Key features

The French Government made temporary changes to the insolvency law in order to protect companies, employees and managers from the cash flow consequences of the state of health emergency (Government order dated 27 March 2020 (No. 2020-341)).

When a debtor is in cessation of payments, it generally has 45 days from the 'cash-flow insolvency' to file for insolvency. The Government decided that the cash-flow insolvency of an enterprise shall be assessed based on its status on 12 March 2020 or the time of the expiry of the state of health emergency increased by three months.

The High Court of Hong Kong refused to allow a Chapter 11 Trustee to disclose a Decision from Hong Kong winding up proceedings in the US bankruptcy court. The US proceedings were commenced to prevent a creditor from taking action following a breach of undertakings given to the Hong Kong court in circumstances where the company had no jurisdictional connection with the US.

Following our previous article, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal following the High Court deciding that a moratorium in relation to restructuring proceedings in Azerbaijan could not be extended in breach of the Gibbs rule, allowing two significant creditors to proceed with their claims in the English Courts.

Despite the debtor's contention that his primary residence was in the United States, the Court held that it had jurisdiction to make a Bankruptcy Order following a petition presented by HMRC.

HMRC presented a bankruptcy petition against Robert Stayton on 30 May 2014 who owed approximately £653,640. The matter came before the court on a number of occasions before the final hearing, with judgment being handed down in November 2018.

A discharged Bankrupt had intentionally misled the Court as to his COMI being in England and Wales in order to obtain a Bankruptcy Order. Four years after the making of the Bankruptcy Order, the Court annulled it on the grounds that the Court did not have jurisdiction to make the Order in the first place.