Fulltext Search

The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services (the Committee) has delivered its report following 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”.

我国现行的《环境保护法》、《民法典》侵权责任编、《企业破产法》以及最高人民法院相关司法解释对于追究企业的环境侵权民事责任作出了相应的规定,但对于企业破产阶段的环境侵权之债的清偿顺序问题,并未作出明确规定,如果仅将其作为普通债权进行处理,往往导致企业的环境债务无法得到清偿。在此前提下,破产程序中的环境债务问题已引起司法部门高度重视。2022年11月4日,贵阳市中级人民法院出台的《贵阳市中级人民法院关于审理企业破产案件中涉生态环境问题处理的工作指引》,体现出法院不断强化环境保护司法力度的趋势;2023年2月,最高人民法院发布的推进碳达峰碳中和典型案例四“杭州某球拍公司破产清算案”[1],将案涉危废物处置费用作为破产费用列支,充分反映出司法对生态环境保护愈加强化。

破产企业环境债务与职工债务、税务债务一样,均具有社会性、公益性的特殊性质,同时环境债务所承载的环境治理长远性意义尤甚。因此,破产企业环境债务的清偿问题亟待厘清。

一、企业破产程序中的环境债务

(一)环境债务的形成

In the much-anticipated decision of Bryant v Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd [2023] HCA 2 (Badenoch (HCA)), the High Court of Australia (the HCA) has now confirmed that the peak indebtedness rule may not be used when assessing the quantum of an unfair preference claim arising from a continuing business relationship.

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).

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]

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.

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).