In Bank of Montreal v. Iskenderov, 2023 ONCA 528, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that actions to set aside a conveyance under section 2 of the Fraudulent Conveyances Act are subject to the basic two-year limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002 – not the ten-year period prescribed by section 4 of the Real Property Limitations Act.
The Law of 7 August 2023 on businesses preservation and modernization of bankruptcy law (the “Law”) will come into force on 1st November 2023. On 19 July 2023, the Luxembourg parliament finally adopted the related draft bill, after more than a decade since the first draft bill (n° 6539) was presented.
What matters
This article delves into some key considerations for suppliers when dealing with customers where there may be a risk of non-payment or insolvency circumstances and how a supplier can minimise the risk to their cash flow and business.
What matters next
What matters
This article delves into some key considerations for suppliers when dealing with customers where there may be a risk of non-payment or insolvency circumstances and how a supplier can minimise the risk to their cash flow and business.
What matters next
When does the directors' duty arise to consider creditors' interests in the face of insolvency if a liability is disputed? Hayley Capani and Kate Garcia consider the case of Hunt v Singh and conclude we still don't have all the answers.
Dlouho očekávaný zákon o preventivní restrukturalizaci čeká na podpis prezidenta a v následujících dnech nabude účinnosti. Nabídne podnikatelům nové nástroje, jak zavčas řešit své finanční potíže a vyhnout se úpadku.
Dne 23. srpna 2023 schválil Senát návrh zákona o preventivní restrukturalizaci, kterým se značným zpožděním dochází k transpozici směrnice Evropského parlamentu a Rady (EU) 2019/1023 ze dne 20. června 2019 o restrukturalizaci a insolvenci („Zákon“ a „Směrnice“).
On 19 July 2023, the Luxembourg parliament finally passed a new law to modernize insolvency law and preserve businesses, after more than a decade since the first draft bill (n° 6539) was presented.
The recent sanction judgment gives important guidance on the way in which the court's discretion should be exercised when sanctioning a restructuring plan and considers whether it is necessary for opposing parties to provide valuation evidence of their own .
Key takeaways from the judgment
No worse off test: expert evidence
In the recent case of Re Avanti Communications Ltd (In Administration)1, the High Court considered whether charges granted by a satellite business over certain equipment and intangible assets (the Relevant Assets) were fixed or floating.
In its recent judgement in Re Avanti Communications Ltd [2023] EWHC 940 (Ch) ('Avanti') the High Court decided that in some circumstances a charge can take effect as a fixed charge despite the chargor having some flexibility to dispose of assets without the consent of the charge holder.
Background