Fulltext Search

In Re Boart Longyear Ltd (No 2) the Supreme Court of New South Wales recently approved two creditor schemes of arrangement on the application of Boart Longyear Limited. The schemes were considerably amended after the Court indicated at the first hearing that it was not likely to approve the original schemes on fairness grounds. Significantly, the Court ordered the parties to attend a mediation to resolve the fairness issues – something that has not been done before in a scheme of arrangement in either Australia or the United Kingdom.

The English Court of Appeal has recently decided that a corporation that held shares in a company remained a shareholder notwithstanding the shareholding company's dissolution.

BWE Estates Limited had two shareholders: an individual named David who held 75% of its shares and a company, Belvedere Limited, which held the remaining 25%. Although Belvedere was dissolved in 1996, it remained listed as a shareholder in BWE's share register.

In the English High Court, the joint administrators of four English companies within the former Lehman Brothers group sought directions from the Court in respect of a proposed settlement. The settlement would put to rest substantial inter-company claims including those at issue in the 'Waterfall III' proceedings.

In a second application heard on the same day, Hildyard J considered an application by the administrators of Lehman Brothers Europe Limited (LBEL) for directions that would enable a surplus to be distributed to the sole member of LBEL while LBEL remained in administration. The proposed scheme had material benefits for both shareholders and creditors. The administrators acknowledged that the orders sought were an indirect means of circumventing the Insolvency Act 1986 (UK), which does not expressly provide for directors to make distributions during an administration.

The Court of Appeal has recently dismissed an appeal from the High Court's judgment (discussed in our September 2016 update) setting aside a compromise under Part 14 of the Companies Act 1993 after finding that the challenging creditors, who had voted against the compromise, had been unfairly prejudiced by the decision to call only one meeting of creditors.

In Day v The Official Assignee as Liquidator of GN Networks Ltd (in Liq) [2016] NZHC 2400, the High Court rejected a claim that the funding arrangement at issue constituted maintenance or champerty.

众所周知,采矿业面临着艰难的局面。在最近几年的市场繁荣时期,矿业公司承担了空前庞大的债务。目前,随着商品价格的下降和再融资来源的枯竭,这些巨额的债务令许多公司步履维艰,严重威胁着它们的生存。

加拿大

若无法与债权人商定业务解决方案,公司应该考虑向债权人寻求破产法项下的保护。在加拿大拥有资产或在加拿大经营业务且债务金额在五百万以上的公司可获得联邦《公司债权人安排法》(简称,“CCAA”)项下的保护。

CCAA允许公司在重组公司事务时暂缓债权人追诉,同时根据某些条件维持对公司经营的控制。公司,特别是未达到五百万债务门槛的公司,还可以考虑联邦《破产法》项下的和解机制。在本文中,我们将讨论CCAA项下的程序。

CCAA项下程序的第一步是获得法院命令,该命令将暂缓债权人在三十日的初始期限内行使其权利,从而允许公司制定重组方案。在获得首个暂缓命令前,公司无需通知债权人,尽管在许多情况下,建议公司通知其债权人。

若公司能够证明其很有可能将提交重组方案,并且延期不会有损于债权人的整体利益,暂缓命令的期限还可以延长。下达暂缓命令时,法院还将任命独立第三方在命令生效期间,监控公司业务及财务事宜。监控人须向法院报告公司的业务行为,但并不管理或指导公司业务。

It is no secret that the mining sector is facing tough times. In recent boom years, mining companies took on unprecedented amounts of debt. Now that commodity prices have dropped and sources of refinancing have dried up, debt obligations have become overwhelming for many companies, posing a serious risk to their survival.

Canada

The British Columbia Court of Appeal has overturned the B.C. Supreme Court decision inKBA Canada1, which was reviewed in the September 2012 issue of Fully Secured.