With the increase in global trade and business, often involving complex corporate structures in multiple jurisdictions, we expect to see a significant increase in cross-border insolvency and restructuring matters in coming years. This is especially the case with rapid advancements in technology and digital change driving “borderless” transactions and investments in every industry.
The Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo) recently launched a public consultation on its proposed enhancements to Singapore’s corporate restructuring and trading resumption frameworks. Proposed changes to the Mainboard Rules and Catalist Rules (collectively, the Listing Rules) include inclusion of a practice note to provide guidance to issuers with listed securities suspended from trading on the expectations of SGX RegCo and amendments to streamline the application process for resumption of trading for suspended issuers.
Guidance from the General Division of the Singapore High Court on the extent to which the protections afforded by the statutory moratoria for schemes of arrangement conflict with the ability of maritime claimants to protect their interests.
Micro and small companies will be able to use a “Simplified Insolvency Programme” to be introduced by proposed amendments to Singapore’s Insolvency, Restructuring, and Dissolution Act 2018 (IRDA).
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) released a consultation paper (Insolvency and Winding-Up Consultation Paper) on 24 July pertaining to the proposed insolvency and winding-up regime (Insolvency Regime) for the Variable Capital Company (VCC) structure. This is the third in a series of consultation papers released since May 2019 pertaining to the VCC regulations, following the passage of the Variable Capital Companies Act on 1 October 2018.
(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Dec. 4, 2017)
The bankruptcy court grants the motion to dismiss, finding the defendant’s security interest in the debtor’s assets, including its inventory, has priority over the plaintiff’s reclamation rights. The plaintiff sold goods to the debtor up to the petition date and sought either return of the goods delivered within the reclamation period or recovery of the proceeds from the sale of such goods. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 546(c), the Court finds the reclamation rights are subordinate and the complaint should be dismissed. Opinion below.
(B.A.P. 6th Cir. Nov. 28, 2017)
The Sixth Circuit B.A.P. affirms the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of the Chapter 12 bankruptcy case. The court finds that the bankruptcy court failed to give the debtor proper notice and opportunity to be heard prior to the dismissal. However, the violation of due process was harmless error. The delay in filing a confirmable plan and continuing loss to the estate warranted the dismissal. Opinion below.
Judge: Preston
Attorney for Appellant: Heather McKeever