Fulltext Search

On 18 September 2025, the Chancellor of the High Court, the Rt. Hon. Sir Julian Flaux announced the long-awaited publication of the updated Practice Statement in relation to schemes of arrangement and restructuring plans (the "New Practice Statement"). Revision of the existing Practice Statement was, in large part, driven by the rise in contested schemes and restructuring plans which, in turn, has put significant pressure on the Court system.

The English High Court has sanctioned a restructuring plan in respect of EUR 3.2 billion of bonds issued by the German real estate business, Adler Group. The main objective of the plan was to avoid Adler's imminent insolvency by facilitating access to EUR 937.5 million of new money funding and thereby providing a stable platform from which Adler Group can pursue a solvent wind-down by asset sales over time in recovered market conditions. This represents a novel use of the restructuring plan procedure, which has previously been seen exclusively as a corporate 'rescue' tool.

While the timing of competing English and German insolvency applications in Re Galapagos allowed for clear determination of jurisdiction under the UK Insolvency Regulation, there remains potential uncertainty as to how similar competing applications made following 31 December 2020 will be resolved in the post-Brexit environment.

Background

This week’s TGIF considers a recent case where the Supreme Court of Queensland rejected a director’s application to access an executory contract of sale entered into by receivers and managers on the basis it was not a ‘financial record’

Key Takeaways

This week’s TGIF looks at the decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Donoghue v Russells (A Firm)[2021] FCA 798 in which Mr Donoghue appealed a decision to make a sequestration order which was premised on him ‘carrying on business in Australia' for the purpose of section 43(1)(b)(iii) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) (Act).

Key Takeaways

This week’s TGIF considers an application to the Federal Court for the private hearing of a public examination where separate criminal proceedings were also on foot.

Key takeaways

This week’s TGIF looks at a recent decision of the Victorian Supreme Court, where a winding up application was adjourned to allow the debtor company to pursue restructuring under the recently introduced small business restructuring reforms.

Key takeaways

前记

执行是实现生效裁判文书债权的“最后关键一环”,是维护当事人合法权益的“最后一公里”。囿于执行领域纷繁复杂的法律规定以及各地司法实践的尺度不一,执行往往成为争议解决的重点及难点。我们长期专注于执行领域,代理了大量金融资管公司、上市公司的公证债权文书、诉讼/仲裁的执行案件。为此,基于执行实务经验,我们着眼于当前执行领域的热点难点问题,推出执行干货系列专题文章,敬请关注。

专题二

目前,法院通过网络拍卖平台处置财产已成为处置执行财产的主要方式,相比传统拍卖模式而言网络拍卖的效率可能更高,也更有利于保护债权的实现以及债务人的合法权益。近年来,越来越多的破产财产也同样通过网络拍卖平台高效处置。实践中,竞买人经常因为种种原因事后意图“悔拍”并寻求救济。对此,破产网络拍卖相关纠纷究竟属于何种性质?竞买人应选择什么程序进行救济?拍卖公告是否一律不得修改?本文结合司法实践对前述疑问进行单刀直入地解析。

破产网络拍卖的性质

This week’s TGIF takes a look at the recent case of Mills Oakley (a partnership) v Asset HQ Australia Pty Ltd [2019] VSC 98, where the Supreme Court of Victoria found the statutory presumption of insolvency did not arise as there had not been effective service of a statutory demand due to a typographical error in the postal address.

What happened?

This week’s TGIF examines a decision of the Victorian Supreme Court which found that several proofs had been wrongly admitted or rejected, and had correct decisions been made, the company would not have been put into liquidation.

BACKGROUND