In Tynefield Care Ltd (and others) v the New India Assurance Company Ltd1 the indemnity claims of the insured Claimant companies were dismissed, and policies avoided from inception for breach of the duty of fair presentation under the Insurance Act 2015. The breach related to the insolvency history of one of the de facto or shadow directors of the Claimant companies.
This judgment therefore adds to the post-2015 Act case law considering breach of the duty of fair presentation.
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision in the case of Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165. Justice Sotomayor, writing for a unanimous Court, ruled that “pure omissions are not actionable under Rule 10b-5(b).” In other words, a pure omission (i.e., where a speaker says nothing) cannot support a private claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b–5, even if such an omission could constitute a violation of Item 303 of Regulation S-K (“Item 303”).
On 31 October 2023, Federal Law No. 51 of 2023 Promulgating the Financial and Bankruptcy Law (the Bankruptcy Law) was published in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Official Gazette, repealing the prior federal law on bankruptcy (Federal Law No. 9 of 2016, the Prior Law) and significantly developing the bankruptcy regime in the UAE.
In one of the most highly anticipated judgments in the European restructuring market in recent years, on 23 January 2024, the English Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision sanctioning the Adler restructuring plan.1
HFW DISPUTES DIGEST 2023
Welcome to the second annual Disputes Digest, in which we collate our 2023 global HFW LITIGATION and International Arbitration publications in one place.
This edition includes updates from across our Disputes arena, including England and Wales, BVI, AsiaPac, and the Middle East.
COMMODITIES CASE UPDATE JULY 2023 HFW COMMODITIES CASE UPDATE JULY 2023 We are delighted to present the July 2023 edition of the Commodities Case Update, with a summary of 12 key recent cases relevant to the commodities sector. With a market leading commodities team, we have over 100 lawyers who provide a full service internationally. The group is led by a team of over 25 partners, who are based in all our offices around the world, including in the major trading hubs of London, Paris, Geneva, Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong and Sydney.
Over recent years, a prolonged period of low interest rates, together with a competitive financing market, has resulted in greater leverage and control for private companies (and their sponsors) when it comes to negotiating terms with current and potential creditors. There has also been, as a consequence of this dynamic and the general availability of capital, an expansion in debt document flexibility over the course of the last decade.
Earlier today, Southern District of Texas Bankruptcy Judge David R. Jones (the “Court”) issued an oral ruling on motions for summary judgment regarding the propriety of Serta’s 2020 “uptier” liability management transaction (the “Transaction”). As described below, the Court ruled that the term “open market purchase” in the governing credit agreements was unambiguous, and that the Transaction “very clearly” was an open market purchase.
COMMERCIAL | JANUARY 2023 BANKRUPTCY IN THE UAE PART 2: DIRECTORS’ DUTIES 1. Introduction One of the most common ways of conducting business within the UAE is through an onshore limited liability company. Commercial companies incorporated onshore in the UAE have a separate legal personality.1 The company can enter into legally binding agreements in its own name and take on valid and binding obligations.
One of the most common ways of conducting business within the UAE is through an onshore limited liability company. Commercial companies incorporated onshore in the UAE have a separate legal personality.1 The company can enter into legally binding agreements in its own name and take on valid and binding obligations. Actions of the directors of a company, on behalf of such a company, generally bind the company.2 Generally, any liabilities resulting from those actions are for the account of the company, rather than for the account of the individual directors in their personal capacity.