The decision raises new questions about whether cross-border insolvency recognition and assistance between mainland China and Hong Kong will be a two-way street.

A restructuring plan completed earlier this year by Smile Telecoms notches up a number of firsts.

African telecommunications provider Smile Telecoms Holding Limited, incorporated in Mauritius, successfully completed a restructuring plan (the Plan) under Part 26A of the UK Companies Act 2006 at the end of March 2021.

The Plan features a number of novel actions, including:

Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the practice in France, Hong Kong, Italy, Singapore, and the United Kingdom and as an affiliated partnership conducting the practice in Japan. Latham & Watkins operates in South Korea as a Foreign Legal Consultant Office. Latham & Watkins works in cooperation with the Law Office of Salman M. Al-Sudairi in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The reforms, which are the result of the transposition of the EU’s Restructuring Directive, should come into force in October.

Key Points:

The decision provides new judicial guidance for determining the boundaries of cross-class cram down tests. 

On 28 June 2021, the High Court declined to sanction a restructuring plan proposed by Hurricane Energy plc (Hurricane), an AIM listed oil drilling company, under Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (Act). The plan would have seen shareholders diluted to 5% of Hurricane’s equity, with the remaining 95% issued to bondholders as consideration for a partial debt-for-equity swap. 

The ruling confirmed that Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 has extensive international reach, and does not require a transaction at an undervalue to leave the debtor with insufficient assets.

Background

The decision confirms that company voluntary arrangements remain a flexible tool for restructuring leasehold portfolios.

• No rigid test exists for “basic fairness” that requires a landlord to receive at least market rent, or that contractual rent should be interfered with to the minimum extent necessary.

• If a landlord is entitled to terminate the lease and receive a better outcome than in the alternative, any automatic unfairness from changes to the terms of the lease is negated.

• Whether a CVA is unfairly prejudicial depends on all the circumstances of the case.

Rechtbank Noord-Holland heeft op 19 februari 2021 de eerste twee akkoorden onder de WHOA gehomologeerd. Het betroffen akkoorden van Jurlights B.V. en Jurlights Holding B.V., een werkmaatschappij en een holding actief in de evenementen-branche.

In de uitspraak van Rechtbank Rotterdam van 3 maart 2021 is door verzoekster aan de rechtbank de vraag voorgelegd, of onderscheid in behandeling van de concurrente crediteuren (een weigeringsgrond oplevert die) aan homologatie van een akkoord in de weg zou staan.

WHOA: Alle in het 1e kwartaal van 2021 gepubliceerde rechterlijke uitspraken gebundeld Op 1 januari 2021 is de Wet Homologatie Onderhands Akkoord (“WHOA”) in werking getreden. Het eerste kwartaal na inwerkingtreding zijn 17 rechterlijke uitspraken met betrekking tot de WHOA gepubliceerd. Het insolventieteam van Ploum bestaande uit Vincent Terlouw, Suzanne van Aalst en Boaz van Honk houdt de ontwikkelingen nauwlettend in de gaten. In deze door Suzanne van Aalst opgestelde bijdrage zal de essentie van deze uitspraken worden behandeld.