Introduction
The statutory jurisdiction of Hong Kong Courts to wind up a foreign-incorporated company in Hong Kong is subject to self-imposed restraints that have been articulated as the “three core requirements” which must be satisfied before the court would exercise that jurisdiction.
In the recent case of Re Guoan International Ltd[2023] HKCU 939, the Court of First Instance (“CFI”) considered whether to wind up a foreign-incorporated company which has already been wound up by the court in its place of incorporation.
简介
香港法院在香港将外国注册公司清盘的法定司法管辖权,受到法院自设的限制所规限;该等限制被称为法院行使上述司法管辖权之前所须符合的三大核心要求。
最近在Re Guoan International Ltd[2023] HKCU 939一案中,原讼法庭(「原讼庭」)需考虑是否将一间已被其注册地点的法院清盘的外国注册公司清盘。
案情
国安国际有限公司(「该公司」)的债权人Road Shine Developments Limited(「呈请人」)于2022年12月2日向香港法庭提出呈请,请求发出将该公司清盘的附属命令。该公司于开曼群岛注册成立,于2022年2月28日被开曼群岛大法院清盘,而袁子俊先生及Martin Trott先生于同日获委任为其清盘人(「共同清盘人」)。反对呈请的债权人Chong Chin先生及Yao Sze Ling女士(统称「反对债权人 」)基于两个主要理由反对呈请:
In January, we wrote about Highland Capital Management, L.P. and the reorganized debtor’s filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari, by which the reorganized debtor asked the Supreme Court to consider whether section 524(e) of the Bankruptcy Code prohibits non-debtor exculpations.
With all the market turmoil and headlines about insolvencies or potential insolvencies in the financial sector and the wider markets, and potential rescue of stressed/distressed entities, many clients are concerned, and should be thinking, about the potential impact of these developments on their derivatives (commonly documented under an ISDA master agreement (an ISDA)) and, in particular: (a) if the relevant event constitutes a default, potential event of default, event of default or termination event or, alternatively, will trigger automatic early termination, under their ISDAs with their
A company voluntary arrangement (CVA) is a tool which has been widely utilised by companies seeking to restructure and compromise liabilities.
In recent years CVAs have been in the limelight because of attacks by landlords who feel that they have been unfairly prejudiced by the CVA terms. Largely, challenges such as those to the Regis and New Look CVAs have been unsuccessful, but arguments about unfair prejudice based on “vote swamping” were left open for future debate.
Can a liquidator run an unjust enrichment claim to seek to recover PAYE and NIC liabilities from a company’s directors arising from the company’s use of a “disguised remuneration” employee benefit trust (“EBT”) scheme? Based on the findings of ICC Judge Barber in the case of Re Ethos Solutions Ltd, the answer is “no”.
EBTs: Background
On Sunday evening, March 12, 2023, the US Department of the Treasury, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Board (Federal Reserve) and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) released a joint statement announcing various actions to stabilize the US banking system, in light of the widely publicized failures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank (Signature Bank), each of which was closed by their respective state chartering authorities, with the FDIC appointed as receiver.
An all too typical fact pattern involves a small-time ne’er-do-well infringing on the rights of a much bigger corporation. When the corporation is forced to bring a lawsuit, the “little guy” infringer cries poverty and seeks a settlement. An oft-used tactic of corporations is to settle the matter quickly (and before too much in attorneys’ fees has been incurred) for a relatively modest sum (or even no money at all) while also including a mechanism by which any breach of the settlement agreement triggers the filing of an agreed judgment for a large sum of money.
Supply chains are facing a fresh barrage of challenges. There are an almost infinite variety of issues that can arise within the supply chain. Minor irritants that historically may have just made business a bit more difficult to transact can, in the current environment, cumulatively exert significant pressure. Additionally, an over reliance on a third party or failure to spot the weakest links in this chain could have a catastrophic impact on your business
In our latest insight, we consider how to identify pinch points in your supply chain and de-risk them.
簡介
英國和香港的法例均規定,債權人只可以就其應獲支付的算定金額提出破產呈請,但相關法例條文並無界定何謂「算定金額」(liquidated sum)。在Re Dusoruth (a bankrupt) Dusoruth v Orca Finance UK Ltd (in liquidation) [2022] EWHC 2346 (Ch) 一案中,英格蘭及威爾斯商業及財產法庭(「法院」)澄清,復還不當得利的申索不論如何確切,仍不能被視為算定金額,因此不能成為破產呈請的依據。
背景
申請人是一名商人,亦是在英國、英屬維爾京群島及馬爾他等多個司法管轄區註冊的多間公司的最終擁有人。他以其中一家公司進行欺詐,遊說富戶投資,然後透過無抵押貸款將資金轉移到他控制的其他公司。申請人被他其中一間正在清盤的公司(「答辯人」)基於以下債務提出破產呈請(「該破產呈請」),並於2020年11月被判定破產:
1.從答辯人的銀行帳戶支付,用於清償申請人的個人信用卡帳單的361,899.73歐元;及