Federal district courts, with the consent of the parties, are authorized by statute to refer "civil matter[s]" to magistrate judges for the purpose of conducting all proceedings and entering a judgment in the litigation. In the case of an appeal to a district court from a bankruptcy court, however, this statutory authority arguably conflicts with another statutory provision dictating that appeals from a bankruptcy court order or judgment be heard by a "district court" or a "bankruptcy appellate panel." This apparent conflict was recently addressed by the U.S.

In Short

The Situation: Bankruptcy courts have split on what rate of post-petition interest unimpaired creditors of a solvent debtor are entitled to receive. Bankruptcy courts have variously ruled that such creditors were entitled to the contractual rate of interest, interest at the federal judgment rate (about the rate on a one-year Treasury bill) as of the bankruptcy petition date, or an equitable rate. Another possibility is that no interest is payable at all.

In Short

The Situation: As businesses continue to grapple with realising the value of business and assets which are potentially impacted by sanctions related to Russia's war in Ukraine, an English company recently utilised an insolvency process to seek court approval for a proposed divestment.

WHITE PAPER An Update on Insolvency in the Australian Construction Industry The construction sector in Australia has long been affected by insolvency and broader liquidity issues. In the last year, construction companies accounted for 26% of businesses that entered into insolvency, and insolvencies in the construction sector more than doubled. This year, contractors have been further squeezed by inflation, supply chain issues and labour market shortages. As the federal government has wound back its COVID-19 economic stimulus packages, further collapses seem inevitable.

BUSINESS RESTRUCTURING REVIEW VOL. 21 • NO. 4 JULY–AUGUST 2022 1 IN THIS ISSUE 1 U.S.

债权人该如何策略追讨欠款及清盘行动

客户简报

2022 年 7 月 19 日

关于香港法院就境外公司清盘和承认境外清盘的权力的最新案例

如果呈请人会因提起法院的清盘程序而获益，而不是从颁布清盘令中获益，那么香港法院是否应该对境外公司行使清盘的司法管辖权？香港终审法院（终审法院）近期对这一问题作了阐明¹。

原讼法庭亦阐述了评估是否应承认境外清盘以及是否应向境外委任的清盘人提供协助的正确做法²。

The Court of Final Appeal (the CFA) has recently clarified whether a Hong Kong court should exercise its winding-up jurisdiction over foreign companies if the petitioner would derive benefit from the invocation of the court’s winding-up process but not from the making of a winding-up order [1].

Corporate Update is our fortnightly bulletin highlighting the latest legal and regulatory developments which we consider to be of relevance to in-house corporate counsel.

In Short

The Situation: In February 2020, amendments to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) expanded the kinds of transactions that may be voidable if a company is being wound up to include asset disposals undertaken as part of illegal phoenixing schemes. Such disposals are termed as "creditor-defeating dispositions" in the legislation.

To promote the finality and binding effect of confirmed chapter 11 plans, the Bankruptcy Code categorically prohibits any modification of a confirmed plan after it has been "substantially consummated." Stakeholders, however, sometimes attempt to skirt this prohibition by characterizing proposed changes to a substantially consummated chapter 11 plan as some other form of relief, such as modification of the confirmation order or a plan document, or reconsideration of the allowed amount of a claim. The U.S.