1. The CMS Law-Now article “Arbitration agreement does not prevent winding up petition” updated the position in England & Wales following the Privy Council decision in Sian Participation Corporation (In Liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd [2024] UKPC 16 (“Sian”).
The UK Supreme Court handed down its decision in BTI v Sequana on 5 October 2022, unanimously dismissing the appeal from the 2019 Court of Appeal decision and confirming how directors duties ought to be applied when a company is in the zone of insolvency. Although decisions of the UK Supreme Court are not binding upon the jurisdictions in which Ogier practises law, it will nevertheless be highly persuasive and influence the approach taken in the offshore jurisdictions that Ogier advises upon.
Legal claims can only be brought within the applicable limitation period prescribed by the Limitation Act (1996 Revision). A defendant to any claim that is time-barred has a complete defence. Prior to the recent decision ofRitchie Capital Management LLC et al (Ritchie) v Lancelot Investors Fund Ltd (Lancelot) and General Electric Company (GE), it had been generally understood that the Cayman approach to claims against companies in liquidation would follow the English position on the issue of limitation.
Hong Kong Court records available publicly today show that a Petition was presented last Friday to wind up O.W. Bunker China Ltd (a Hong Kong company). The records indicate that the Winding-up Petition was presented by the company itself rather than a creditor. This is consistent with the steps taken by other companies within the OW Bunker group to seek Court protection.
We are receiving numerous enquiries regarding the fallout from the bankruptcy of OW Bunker A/S and certain associated companies. At this stage, some companies are in formal bankruptcy proceedings, with the Court protection that usually entails, but others are not.