The Federal Court of Australia (Court) has handed down the first reported decision on the ipso facto stay provisions contained in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act).
Chief Justice Hammerschlag, sitting in the New South Wales Supreme Court (the Court), has delivered a judgement of importance to secured creditor and insolvency practitioners alike in Volkswagen Financial Services Australia Pty Ltd v Atlas CTL Pty Ltd (Recs and Mngrs Apptd) (In liq) [2022] NSWSC 573 (Atlas).
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services (the Committee) has commenced an inquiry into the “effectiveness of Australia’s corporate insolvency laws in protecting and maximising value for the benefit of all interested parties and the economy”.[1]
De Herstructureringsrichtlijn van 20 juni 2019 zorgt voor het eerst op Europees niveau voor een harmonisatie van de wetgeving omtrent insolventie.
Een belangrijk onderdeel van deze Richtlijn heeft betrekking op preventieve herstructureringsstelsels, die tot doel hebben de vereffening van levensvatbare ondernemingen te vermijden.
In België zal dit voornamelijk een impact hebben op de gerechtelijke reorganisatie, en meer bepaald op de gerechtelijke reorganisatie door een collectief akkoord.
The Restructuring Directive of 20 June 2019 harmonises insolvency legislation for the first time at the European level.
An important part of this Directive concerns preventive restructuring frameworks, which aim to limit the unnecessary liquidation of viable companies.
In Belgium, this will mainly impact judicial reorganisation, and more specifically judicial reorganisation by means of collective agreement.
La directive du 20 juin 2019 relative aux restructurations harmonise pour la première fois la législation sur l'insolvabilité au niveau européen.
Une partie importante de cette directive concerne les cadres de restructuration préventive, qui visent à limiter la liquidation inutile d'entreprises viables.
En Belgique, cela aura principalement un impact sur la réorganisation judiciaire, et plus particulièrement sur la réorganisation judiciaire par accord collectif.
A recent Hong Kong Court of Appeal decision examined a creditor’s right to commence bankruptcy/insolvency proceedings where the petition debt arises from an agreement containing an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of a foreign court: Guy Kwok-Hung Lam v Tor Asia Credit Master Fund LP [2022] HKCA 1297.
A recent law, which came into force on 21 July 2022, amends the regulation for the accounting professions with regard to their professional practice and the anti-money laundering prevention.
The law was enacted after the Constitutional Court ruled in two judgments that various provisions of the law relating to the audit profession and the anti-money laundering law were against the constitution.
Hereafter we discuss the impact of the new law on auditors, certified public accountants and the unregulated tax advisors.
In The Australian Sawmilling Company Pty Ltd (in liq) v Environment Protection Authority [2021] VSCA 294 (Australian Sawmilling), the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal (VSCA) dismissed an appeal by the liquidators of The Australian Sawmilling Company Pty Ltd (TASCO) against a decision of Garde J of the Victorian Supreme Court (VSC) setting aside the liquidators’ disclaimer of land subject to significant environmental ‘clean up’ costs (Primary Judgment).
Historically, the Hong Kong courts have generally recognised foreign insolvency proceedings commenced in the jurisdiction in which the company is incorporated. This may no longer be the case in Hong Kong following the recent decision of Provisional Liquidator of Global Brands Group Holding Ltd v Computershare Hong Kong Trustees Ltd [2022] HKCFI 1789 (Global Brands).