This week’s TGIF considers a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Forex Capital Trading Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Invesus Group Limited [2024] NSWSC 867). Justice Ball determined that admission of a proof of debt by a liquidator was not akin to a judgment or settlement, and that such an admission did not create a new liability of the company.
In a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (In the matter of Pacific Plumbing Group Pty Limited (in liquidation) [2024] NSWSC 525), Justice Black determined that a payment made by a third party was not an unfair preference because the payment did not diminish assets available to creditors.
Key Takeaways
The Federal Court in Morgan, in the matter of Traditional Values Management Limited (in liq)[2024] FCA 74, approved an abridged process that allowed the liquidator to admit debts of a group of unsecured creditors without requiring a formal proof of debt.
Key Takeaways
On 31 October 2023, Federal Law No. 51 of 2023 Promulgating the Financial and Bankruptcy Law (the Bankruptcy Law) was published in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Official Gazette, repealing the prior federal law on bankruptcy (Federal Law No. 9 of 2016, the Prior Law) and significantly developing the bankruptcy regime in the UAE.
In this week’s TGIF, we consider ASIC v Bettles [2023] FCA 975 and ASIC v Jones [2023] WASCA 130, two cases which bring into focus the conduct of insolvency practitioners and alleged abrogation of their duties and independence.
Key takeaways
In this week’s TGIF, we consider Jahani, in the matter of Ralan Property Services Pty Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) (in liq) [2023] FCA 738, a Federal Court decision approving the liquidators’ entry into funding agreements.
Key takeaways
一只基金在经历“募、投、管、退”几个阶段后,会进入其生命周期的最后一个阶段:清盘和解散,这个阶段涉及对于基金的资产的盘点、处置、分配以及一些法定的清盘和解散程序的履行。虽然在清盘阶段,需要盘点资产、处置及分配,但其实很多基金在运营过程中已经根据其合伙协议下的瀑布式分配条款向投资人完成了绝大多数分配(如下图所示),清盘很多时候仅成为一个注销基金的程序性必经环节而已。
点击可查看大图
有时候由于跨境重组中精简结构或者其他商业上的考虑,一些PE基金的主体也需要清盘和注销。无论是由于期限到期清盘,还是由于重组而清盘,大多数开曼PE基金会采用自愿清盘(voluntary liquidation)的方式退出,因此我们在本文中会重点介绍开曼法下豁免有限合伙的自愿清盘,也会对开曼法下的剔除(strike-off)程序在豁免有限合伙场景下的应用进行简单介绍。
In this week’s TGIF, we consider the Court of Appeal’s decision in Anchorage Capital Master Offshore Ltd v Sparkes [2023] NSWCA 88 and the challenges faced by lenders in accepting representations as to solvency and the financial position of borrowers.
Key takeaways
This week’s, TGIF considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in Westgem Investments Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd [2022] WASCA 132, handed down on 4 November 2022 in favour of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd and Lloyds Banking Group (Financiers).
Key takeaways
一、股东的责任
一般来说,股东只就其认购股份的出资承担责任,而如果公司无偿债能力进而清盘,股东层面并不负有任何法律责任。但仍需注意可能存在的例外情况,例如:
第一,穿透公司法人人格向股东追索。如某人在已有债务的情况下,通过将财产转移给新设立公司的方法逃避该既有债务,法院可能判令要求穿透公司面纱。而在实践中该法律原则因要求严格,很少能够被使用。
第二,股东参与到公司有欺诈目的的资产转移当中,或作为不正当的协助者、不正当的收受财产者,或者参与策划该欺诈行为等。
二、董事和公司管理人员的责任
在清盘开始后,董事实际上失去了管理公司的权力,但是由于董事的地位,其需要在以下两种情形下承担责任:一是如果他违反了原本就对公司负有的义务,清盘人代表公司能够向董事进行追责;二是在清盘前和清盘过程中,董事均负有特定的责任。
一方面,董事负有一般的对公司的信义义务,包括为公司利益行使权利,为公司避免利益冲突等,以及其他法定义务,比如董事必须采取一切合理步骤确保公司备存及保留会计记录至少7年(如有),以及必须确保公司按时提交财务报表等。如这些行为已经发生,董事可能需要承担责任。