It is not uncommon for contractors, in several industry sectors, to contract with a special purpose vehicle (SPV), whose day-to-day management is effectively controlled by a parent company, and the SPV has with little to no assets beyond cash flow provided by its parent. In this article we look at what a claimant could do outside of the traditional insolvency process in circumstances where the SPV goes into a form of external administration such as administration or liquidation and there are no assets available to the external administrators.
In the recent decision of Re PBS Building (Qld) Pty Ltd [2024] QSC 108, the Supreme Court of Queensland considered for the first time the operation of the State’s new project and retention trust account regime in the context of an insolvency. The decision provides useful guidance to insolvency practitioners and subcontractors as to their rights in relation to trust accounts established by an insolvent head contractor.
The High Court of Australia’s decision in Wells Fargo Trust Company, National Association (as Owner Trustee) & Anor v VB Leaseco Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) & Ors (the “Willis” case).
On Wednesday, 16 March 2022, the High Court of Australia handed down its decision in the Willis case.
Background
Following our previous alert here on Justice Middleton’s decision in Wells Fargo Trust Company, National Association (trustee) v VB Leaseco Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed),[1] the administra
On 14 May 2015, Australia acceded to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment (“Cape Town Convention”) and the Protocol to the Cape Town Convention (“Cape Town Protocol”). In particular, for insolvency related proceedings, Australia adopted what is known as “Alternative A” in aviation industry speak. The Cape Town Convention became effective as Australian law on 1 September 2015 and applies to the relevant aviation leasing and financing transitions entered into after that date.
上一篇我们谈到诉讼主体的确定问题,本文将从担保的视角对债券持有人的权利救济予以分析。
保证人单方出具《保证函》的效力
任何在中国内地(“”)注册成立的企业,如不能清偿到期债务,并且资产不足以清偿全部债务或者明显缺乏清偿能力的,可由该企业或其债权人(“”)提交破产申请,继而根据《中华人民共和国企业破产法》(“《破产法》”)对该企业发起破产法律程序。但是,长期以来,备受业内人士诟病的是,中国法院迟迟未对破产申请实施立案登记制度。在此背景下,最高人民法院(“”)于2016年7月颁布指导通知[1](“《2016年最高院通知》”),旨在简化和规范登记破产案件的立案受理工作。
最高院通知:优化立案程序