在最新的 Re USUM Investment Group Ltd[2026] HKCFI 1320 一案中，香港公司法庭就普通法下对内地重整程序的承认（recognition）与协助（assistance），处理了若干“新颖而重要的问题（Novel and Important Questions）”，包括：香港法庭是否有权承认经境外法院（本案为内地法院）批准的企业破产重整；如有，具体的协助范围包括哪些？

本案中，香港公司法庭最终批准了由重庆市第五中级人民法院委任的管理人（Administrators）在香港提出的申请。该判决为日后内地与香港跨境重整的处理方式提供了更清晰的、权威性的分析路径，并进一步强化香港作为普通法跨境破产／重整枢纽司法管辖区的定位。

事实背景

In Re USUM Investment Group Ltd[2026] HKCFI 1320, the Hong Kong Companies Court delivered a landmark judgment concerned with “novel and important questions as to whether the court has power to recognize a restructuring approved by a foreign court and, if so, the extent of such assistance”.

Under § 547(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (emphasis added):

• “the trustee may, based on reasonable due diligence in the circumstances of the case and taking into account a party’s known or reasonably knowable affirmative defenses under subsection (c), avoid [a preferential transfer.” 

Question: What amount of detail is required in a preference complaint to satisfy the above-quoted “reasonable due diligence” requirement?

Here’s a judicial estoppel hypothetical:

• debtor files Subchapter V bankruptcy and achieves a confirmed plan;
• in the bankruptcy debtor fails to disclose a pre-petition lawsuit claim;
• after plan confirmation, debtor files suit on the pre-petition lawsuit claim; and
• defendant seeks dismissal of the lawsuit, with prejudice, on grounds of judicial estoppel—i.e., for debtor/plaintiff’s failure to disclose the claim in bankruptcy.

Question: Who should be the ultimate beneficiary of a lawsuit claim that debtor fails to disclose:

A Petition for Writ of Certiorari has been granted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., Case No. 25-6, on a ruling from the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.[Fn. 1]

The Question Presented in Kethley v. Buddy Ayers is this:

11 U.S.C. § 365(c)(2) says (emphasis added):

Here’s a question about the new Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Act (the “Uniform ABC Act”):

• Is a liquidation under the Uniform ABC Act a good thing or a bad thing for the debtor’s unsecured trade creditors?

The answer is easy: it’s a good thing.

28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(5) provides: “personal injury tort and wrongful death claims shall be tried in the district court in which the bankruptcy case is pending, or in the district court in the district in which the claim arose”

In other words, “personal injury tort” and “wrongful death” claims cannot be tried by a bankruptcy court.

The U.S. Supreme Court does not like the Bankruptcy Code. It never has. Two examples are:

Mass torts and resulting litigation are a reality of life in these United States.

But one of the truly shocking things about mass tort litigation, in recent times, is this:

• judicial delays override the wishes of mass tort victims for prompt payment of negotiated amounts.

A current example of such delays is the Boy Scouts confirmed bankruptcy plan.

Chronology

Here is a short Chronology of the Boy Scouts bankruptcy plan—and the lapse of more than three years since confirmation without a final resolution: