This past Monday, July 26, marked passage of the most recent major milestone in the replacement of LIBOR as the benchmark USD interest rate. Following the recommendation of the CFTC’s Market Risk Advisory Committee (MRAC) Interest Rate Benchmark Reform Subcommittee, on July 26, 2021 interdealer brokers replaced trading in LIBOR linear swaps with SOFR linear swaps. This switch is a precursor to the recommendation of SOFR term rates. The switch does not apply to trades between dealers and their non-dealer customers.
簡介
最近在Re Cheung Hing Chik also known as Charles H.C. Cheung, the debtor [2021] HKCA 981一案中，上訴法院澄清，在決定是否應撤銷破產令時，法院既可考慮在破產令發出之前的事實，也可考慮在破產令發出之後的事實。要成功申請撤銷破產令，申請人須證明涉及與先前法院席前證據有重大差異的特殊情況，作為推翻破產令的充分理據。
背景
本案是就一項於2020年8月3日發出的破產令（「該破產令」）提出的上訴。呈請人是一間公司，其銀行帳戶被破產人偷去或挪用了749,000美元。於2020年2月27日，呈請人就上述金額向破產人發出法定要求償債書，但不獲還款。在2020年8月3日進行的呈請聆訊上，破產人口頭上表示他能夠償還該債務，因為：
- 他可將其於張慶植會計師行有限公司的50% 權益出售，估計約值600萬元；及
- 他可能會收到若干其他資金。
法官不信納，並認為沒有證據顯示破產人能償還債務，因此發出了該破產令。
Introduction
Introduction
In the recent case of Re Cheung Hing Chik also known as Charles H.C. Cheung, the debtor [2021] HKCA 981, the Court of Appeal clarified that in determining whether a bankruptcy order should be rescinded, the court is entitled to take into account facts both before or after the bankruptcy order. To succeed, an applicant for rescission has to show exceptional circumstances, involving a material difference to what was before the court earlier, to justify the overturning of the bankruptcy order.
Background
簡介
中華人民共和國最高人民法院（「最高人民法院」）與香港特別行政區政府於2021年5月14日簽訂了《最高人民法院與香港特別行政區政府關於內地與香港特別行政區法院相互認可和協助破產程序的會談紀要》。在試點計劃下，香港的清盤人可向內地試點地區的有關中級人民法院申請認可香港的清盤程序；同樣地，內地的破產管理人可向香港高等法院申請認可內地的破產程序（「試點計劃」）。最近在Re China All Access (Holdings) Ltd [2021] HKCFI 1842一案中，香港法院首次考慮這項近期發展及試點計劃。
背景
简介
最近在Re Cheung Hing Chik also known as Charles H.C. Cheung, the debtor [2021] HKCA 981一案中，上诉法院澄清，在决定是否应撤销破产令时，法院既可考虑在破产令发出之前的事实，也可考虑在破产令发出之后的事实。要成功申请撤销破产令，申请人须证明涉及与先前法院席前证据有重大差异的特殊情况，作为推翻破产令的充分理据。
背景
本案是就一项于2020年8月3日发出的破产令（「该破产令」）提出的上诉。呈请人是一间公司，其银行帐户被破产人偷去或挪用了749,000美元。于2020年2月27日，呈请人就上述金额向破产人发出法定要求偿债书，但不获还款。在2020年8月3日进行的呈请聆讯上，破产人口头上表示他能够偿还该债务，因为：
- 他可将其于张庆植会计师行有限公司的50% 权益出售，估计约值600万元；及
- 他可能会收到若干其他资金。
法官不信纳，并认为没有证据显示破产人能偿还债务，因此发出了该破产令。
Distressed transactions in bankruptcy court have become big business. Sales under Section 363 of the bankruptcy code provide predictability and reliability (in the form of a court order delivering “free and clear” assets) under even the most turbulent of circumstances. Commonly known simply as “363 sales,” these transactions can provide an opportunistic purchaser with significant upside under the right circumstances. But the truly opportunistic buyer will need to buckle up and be prepared to move with lightning speed in a highly competitive and transparent forum.
Introduction
Though bankruptcy filings are down in 2021, the expiration of the Paycheck Protection Program and reopening of the courts nationwide could lead to a rise in bankruptcy filings with many businesses still struggling to cope with the economic and supply chain aftereffects of the pandemic and consumer purchasing habits. These bankruptcies, in turn, will have an inevitable ripple effect on creditors and other claimants, whose abilities to collect on claims and exercise rights, are significantly restricted by the automatic stay.
On June 10, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an amended complaint for civil money penalties and other relief under Section 5 of the FTC Act prohibiting “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” and Section 521 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) prohibiting the use of fraudulent statements to obtain consumer information.