The actuary is not required to consider the security of benefits where a bulk transfer without member consents is proposed, the Court has decided.
A transfer without consent cannot be made unless the actuary certifies that, in their opinion, the past service rights each member will be credited with in the receiving scheme will be "broadly no less favourable" than their rights in the transferring scheme.
On 3 June 2016, the Hong Kong Government gazetted the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Ordinance 2016 (“Amendment Ordinance”). The date of commencement of the Amendment Ordinance will be appointed by the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury by notice published in the Gazette.
Background
The Key Provisions
After much delay, the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (the “Act”) will come into force on 1 August 2016. The essential purpose of the act is to aid claimants in procuring recoveries from the insurers of insolvent defendants.The Key Provisions
This will be of particular use to businesses that frequently find themselves in litigation with financially weak defendants. However, insolvency practitioners should also take note of the Act as it places new obligations on them.
The Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (the 2010 Act) will finally come into force from 1 August 2016.
The Act improves the rights of claimants who have a claim against an insolvent company or individual to directly claim against the insolvent party’s insurer.
In particular, the 2010 Act brings about the following important changes:
Although the EU Insolvency Regulation and the UNCITRAL Model Law have been with us for some time, decisions involving the court’s recognition of foreign proceedings continue to evolve and will – of necessity – turn on the specific facts of every case. We investigate two recent decisions which came up with very different results.
The background – Re OGX Petroloeo E Gas S.A. [2016] EWHC 25
The past few months have seen some interesting developments in legislative and regulatory requirements in the restructuring and insolvency world. We explore a number of them in this article.
SBEEA – reports on director conduct from 6 April
The Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 (Commencement No 4), Transitional and Savings Provisions Regulations 2016 (SI 2016/321) were made on 9 March 2016.
In our recent note “Treatment of senior unsecured debt in European leveraged finance transactions: the need for an intercreditor agreement”, which can be viewed here, we addressed the increase in flexibility in European financings to incur senior unsecured debt and the risk that the lack of any agreed intercreditor arrangement may impair senior secured lenders’ ability to realise recoveries from a European Credit
The judgment of Snowden J. in the adjournment of the convening hearing relating to a scheme of arrangement (the “Scheme”) proposed by Indah Kiat International Finance Company B.V. (“Indah Kiat”) emphasises some important points that must be borne in mind by debtors, investors and advisers when preparing for a scheme, such as the importance of allowing sufficient time for preparation of all relevant supporting evidence and documentation, and allowing for a realistic notice period for creditors.
While fears of another downturn loom, the European financial markets have innovated, evolved and grown.
Following the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the period that followed, the markets have more understanding of the credit risk spectrum. This includes jurisdictional risk, available restructuring options and the complexity involved in any enforcement process.
The received wisdom is that if, as a debtor, you are considering equitable set-off arguments, you are clutching at straws. A recent case shows a rare example of when such rights can successfully be used however. This article explores the issues further.
The background