簡介

一間公司陷入財政困難時，其中一個重組債務的方法是與債權人訂立債務償還安排（scheme of arrangement）。根據香港法例第622章《公司條例》第673條，法院有權認許債務償還安排。經法院認許的債務償還安排將對公司及擬訂立該安排的債權人或類別債權人具有約束力。

最近在Re Hong Kong Airlines Limited(香港航空有限公司) [2022] HKCFI 3792一案中，法院需考慮是否認許香港一間大型航空公司提出的債務償還安排計劃。

案情

香港航空有限公司（「該公司」）是一間提供客貨空運以及其他航空相關服務的香港公司。由於新冠病毒疫情對航空業界造成嚴重打擊，該公司的現金流周轉不靈，合共欠債約490億港元。除非該公司能將現時債務重組，否則很可能清盤。

简介

一间公司陷入财政困难时，其中一个重组债务的方法是与债权人订立债务偿还安排（scheme of arrangement）。根据香港法例第622章《公司条例》第673条，法院有权认许债务偿还安排。经法院认许的债务偿还安排将对公司及拟订立该安排的债权人或类别债权人具有约束力。

最近在Re Hong Kong Airlines Limited(香港航空有限公司) [2022] HKCFI 3792一案中，法院需考虑是否认许香港一间大型航空公司提出的债务偿还安排计划。

案情

香港航空有限公司（「该公司」）是一间提供客货空运以及其他航空相关服务的香港公司。由于新冠病毒疫情对航空业界造成严重打击，该公司的现金流周转不灵，合共欠债约490亿港元。除非该公司能将现时债务重组，否则很可能清盘。

In bankruptcy as in federal jurisprudence generally, to characterize something with the near-epithet of “federal common law” virtually dooms it to rejection.

In January 2020 we reported that, after the reconsideration suggested by two Supreme Court justices and revisions to account for the Supreme Court’s Merit Management decision,[1] the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stood by its origina

It seems to be a common misunderstanding, even among lawyers who are not bankruptcy lawyers, that litigation in federal bankruptcy court consists largely or even exclusively of disputes about the avoidance of transactions as preferential or fraudulent, the allowance of claims and the confirmation of plans of reorganization. However, with a jurisdictional reach that encompasses “all civil proceedings . . .

I don’t know if Congress foresaw, when it enacted new Subchapter V of Chapter 11 of the Code[1] in the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA”), that debtors in pending cases would seek to convert or redesignate their cases as Subchapter V cases when SBRA became effective on February 19, 2020, but it was foreseeable.

Our February 26 post [1] reported on the first case dealing with the question whether a debtor in a pending Chapter 11 case may redesignate it as a case under Subchapter V, [2] the new subchapter of Chapter 11 adopted by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA”), which became effective on February 19.

Our February 26 post entitled “SBRA Springs to Life”^[1] reported on the first case known to me that dealt with the issue whether a debtor in a pending Chapter 11 case should be permitted to amend its petition to designate it as a case under Subchapter V,^[2] the new subchapter of Chapter 11 adopted by

State governments can be creditors of individuals, businesses and institutions that are debtors in bankruptcy in a variety of ways, most notably as tax and fine collectors but also as lenders. They can also be debtors of debtors, in their role, for example, as the purchasers of vast quantities of goods and services on credit. And they can also be transferees of a debtor’s property in (at least) every role in which they can be creditors.

We have noodled on the impact that the Supreme Court’s decision in Merit Management Group, LP v.