The UK High Court has ruled that the obligations of third-party guarantors are not affected by a part 26A restructuring plan being sanctioned in respect of the underlying obligations. This approach mirrors the way guarantees are dealt with in a part 26 scheme of arrangement.
The case of Oceanfill Ltd. v Nuffield Health Wellbeing Ltd & Cannons Group Limited examined whether a restructuring plan under part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (the “Act”) had the effect of releasing liability arising under a third-party guarantee.
Following a long wait of 18 months, the Supreme Court has today confirmed that the appeal of the decision in BTI –v- Sequana is unanimously dismissed.
The key question that many of us have been waiting for the answer to is: Does the creditor duty set out in s172(3) of the Companies Act 2006 exist and if so, when is it engaged?
The Supreme Court has refused permission for the case of Lock v Stanley to be appealed, meaning that the Court of Appeal’s approach to questions around the assignment by a liquidator of claims in the insolvent estate stands.
Most notably the Court of Appeal confirmed that a liquidator is under no duty to offer defendants the right to acquire the claims against them unless the failure to do so would be perverse.
In the latest edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood's restructuring and insolvency team covers the use of lock-up agreements in schemes of arrangements, and the developments in Singapore and Hong Kong as regards recognition of foreign insolvencies. Our final article is a must-read for lenders, discussing the circumstances under which security may be unwound as a undervalued transaction.
Content
Thanks are owed to SPB summer associate Gabby Martin for her contributions to this article.
Last month, a Florida federal jury found in favor of a credit reporting agency (“CRA”) in a trial centering on whether the CRA took “reasonable” steps to assure the accuracy of a consumer’s credit report after a consumer dispute. The result is a valuable glimpse into how juries view the burdens of the statutory obligations placed on reporting agencies by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”).
Hong Kong’s insolvency regime is based mainly on that of the United Kingdom. The legislation concerning corporate insolvency is contained largely in the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap 32) (“CWUMPO”) and the Companies (Winding-up) Rules. The corporate insolvency and winding up provisions in the legislation are broadly based on the Companies Act 1929 and the Companies Act 1948 of the UK. The last major amendment of those provisions was made in 2016.
A guide to restructuring and insolvency issues and procedures in Hong Kong
Contents
Seahawk China Dynamic Fund [2022] HKCFI 1994 (date of reasons for decision: 4 July 2022)
Introduction
The perceived costs of proposing a restructuring plan are seen to be the biggest inhibitors to using the process for SMEs. It is still a relatively new tool and insolvency practitioners, lawyers and the courts are still grappling with it, but as we have seen recently in Amigo Loans it can provide creative and innovative restructuring solutions[1].
In the matter of an application for recognition and assistance by the provisional liquidator of Global Brands Group Holding Limited (in liquidation) [2022] HKCFI 1789 (date of decision: 23 June 2022)
The Hong Kong Court has recently granted recognition and assistance to the Bermuda provisional liquidator of Global Brands Group Holding Limited (in liquidation) (Global Brands / Company). Stephenson Harwood acted for the provisional liquidator.
Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited [2022] HKCFA 11 (date of judgment 14 June 2022)
Introduction