Two decisions handed down on the same day – one by the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal and the other by the Commercial Division of the High Court – illustrate the approach of British Virgin Islands Courts to applications to appoint liquidators in circumstances where the subject matter of a dispute as to the existence of a debt falls within the scope of an arbitration agreement.

Introduction

A summary winding up is the procedure used to wind up a solvent Jersey company under the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 (the 1991 Law). 

This guide examines the procedure for carrying out a summary winding up. 

Steps

The steps necessary to carry out a summary winding up are as follows:

In October 2022, the English High Court delivered a long-awaited judgment¹ relating to whether or not certain Bankruptcy Events of Default can be cured under the ISDA 2002 and 1992 Master Agreements ("ISDA Master Agreements") - resolving an issue relating to the suspensory effect of conditions precedent to payments and performance under ISDA Master Agreements raised in the English Court of Appeal earlier in the Lehman administration.

In one of the most important trust decisions of recent years, which was handed down on Thursday 13 October 2022, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the JCPC) held that the rights of indemnity of successive trustees against the assets of an insolvent trust fund (ie a trust fund that is unable to meet those liabilities) rank pari passu and not on a first in time basis.

As the UK teeters on the brink of what would appear to be an inevitable recession, new restructuring tools introduced in the UK in 2020 pursuant to the Corporate Insolvency & Governance Act 2020 (“CIGA”) will ensure that issuers and other distressed borrowers can execute more creative and aggressive restructuring strategies than were possible during previous market downturns. A brief summary of the new UK restructuring plan is set out below, together with some examples as to how the restructuring plan is being used in practice.

What is the so-called "creditor duty"?

This is the duty, introduced into English common law by the leading case of West Mercia Safetywear v Dodd1 in 1988, of company directors to consider, or act in accordance with, the interests of the company's creditors when the company becomes insolvent, or when it approaches, or is at real risk of insolvency.

Background

mourant.com 2021934/84654107/1 GUIDE Insolvency claims in Guernsey Last reviewed: September 2022 Contents Introduction 2 Misfeasance / breach of statutory duty 2 Wrongful trading 2 Fraudulent trading 3 Preferences 3 Transactions at undervalue 4 Extortionate credit transactions 4 Director disqualification 4 Relief from sanctions 5 Contacts 5 2 mourant.com 2021934/84654107/1 Introduction When a company enters into a formal insolvency process, the office holder will conduct an examination into the affairs of the company.

Foreign insolvency proceedings (including those ordered by the UK courts) have no direct operation in Guernsey. Therefore foreign insolvency office holders looking to take steps in Guernsey, such a collecting in assets or compelling the production of information from third parties, will need to first be recognised under Guernsey law before steps can be taken in this jurisdiction.

Guernsey has not introduced legislation based on the UNCITRAL model law on cross-border insolvency. It is also not (and was not prior to Brexit) subject to the Recast Insolvency Regulations.

BVI | CAYMAN ISLANDS | GUERNSEY | HONG KONG | JERSEY | LONDON mourant.com 2021934/84489769/1 GUIDE The Solvency Test Last reviewed: September 2022 Contents Introduction 2 The Solvency Test 2 Background 2 Statutory definition 2 The cash flow test 2 The balance sheet test 2 Factors to consider 2 When is the solvency test considered important?

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit recently ruled in the Puerto Rico bankruptcy case that Fifth Amendment takings claims cannot be discharged or impaired by a bankruptcy plan. As a matter of first impression in that circuit, the Court disagreed with the Ninth Circuit and held that former property owners affected by prepetition takings must be paid in full.

In re Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd., 41 F.4th 29 (1st Cir. 2022)