When a company is in financial distress, directors face difficult choices. Should they trade on to try to “trade out” of the company’s financial difficulties or should they file for insolvency? If they act too soon, will creditors complain that they should have done more to save the business? A recent English High Court case raises the prospect of directors potentially being held to account for decisions that “merely postpone the inevitable.”
A Hong Kong court has refused to sanction a scheme of arrangement, saying that practitioners should explain the key terms and effect of any proposed restructuring in a way which can be easily understood by the creditors and the court.
In Re Sino Oiland Gas Holdings Ltd [2024] HKCFI 1135, the Honourable Madam Justice Linda Chan refused to sanction a scheme of arrangement, saying that creditors had been given insufficient information about the restructuring and the scheme that would enable them to make an informed decision at the scheme meeting.
The Hong Kong Court of Appeal has finally laid to rest the vexed issue of whether an arbitration agreement or a winding-up petition should take precedence in an insolvency situation. In two parallel decisions, the Court of Appeal ruled that an arbitration agreement should be treated in the same way as an exclusive jurisdiction clause and that the principle should be given a wide interpretation.
一、问题的提出
债务人向债权人借款,由保证人提供保证担保。借款到期后,债务人与保证人均未偿还该笔借款。后法院裁定受理保证人的破产申请,债权人因此向保证人的管理人申报债权,要求保证人就债务人所欠借款及利息承担保证责任。管理人审查并确认了该笔债权。(简见以下表1案型法律关系表)根据《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民法典〉有关担保制度的解释》(下称“《民法典担保制度解释》”)第22条之规定,[1]保证债权应当自保证人的破产申请受理时起停止计息。与债务人破产时保证债权随同主债权停止计息不同的是,保证人破产导致保证债权停止计息,却不能反向及于主债权也停止计息。其后债务人向债权人清偿了部分债务。此时,管理人将面临如下难题:在主债权未停止计息的情况下,债权人获得债务人部分清偿后,在保证人的破产程序中,管理人先前认定的债权数额是否须要调整?如果须要调整,应该如何进行调整?鉴于该问题在实务中相对较为前沿,笔者曾多次尝试检索与之相关的法规、判例、理论文献、实务文章等,对于解决该问题的资料寥寥无几。虽无前人的解决方案可供参照,但该问题仍然亟待解决。在缺乏相应法律规范的情况下,下文将通过民法基础理论的推演,尝试为解决这一问题提供思路。
The Hong Kong High Court has given a rare order for modifications to a scheme of arrangement after it had been implemented incorrectly by the scheme administrators. Drawing on instances in which the English courts have sanctioned modifications after approval by scheme creditors, the court held that the same principles apply here.
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.
The Hong Kong court has granted an order forcing an uncooperative former director of a Hong Kong listed company to ratify the appointment of a Hong Kong liquidator as the sole director of the companies' four BVI subsidiaries. The court rejected the idea that the liquidators should be made to apply for fresh winding up orders in the BVI and stressed that courts should be ready to offer each other mutual assistance.
Three recent Hong Kong first instance court decisions have left undecided the question of whether a winding-up petition will trump an agreement to arbitrate when it comes to a winding-up and particularly in the context of cross-claims. A Court of Final Appeal decision this spring had seemed to provide pointers that the parties' agreement would be upheld but the issue – particularly when it comes to unmeritorious and late arbitration applications – is dividing the courts.
In the case of Re Guangdong Overseas Construction Corporation [2023] HKCFI 1340, the Honourable Madam Justice Linda Chan recognized and provided assistance to a mainland China appointed administrator over a mainland China company in liquidation despite the administrator's application being outside the scope of the insolvency cooperation mechanism between Hong Kong and mainland China courts. The Hong Kong court affirmed that its jurisdiction to recognize and assist office-holders appointed by a court of another jurisdiction derives from common law.
A Hong Kong court has reminded debtors of the need to present a credible and realistic restructuring proposal when facing creditors threatening winding up actions. In Re Jiayuan International Group Limited (佳源國際控股有限公司) [2023] HKCFI 1254, the Honourable Madam Justice Linda Chan warned that it is not enough for a debtor company to merely point to commercial discussions with some of the creditors when seeking an adjournment.