On November 14, 2019, the Alberta Court of Appeal (the “ABCA”) released its decision in PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc. v. 1905393 Alberta Ltd. (“1905393 Alberta”),1 dismissing an appeal of an approval and vesting order made in the context of a receivership proceeding.
Reconsidering the Lasmos approach to winding-up petitions involving arbitration clauses.
2018-ban indult a magyar fizetésképtelenségi jog reformjával kapcsolatos munka az Igazságügyi Minisztérium irányításával. A 2019. októberében tartott 43. Jogász Vándorgyűlésen dr. Bogdán Tibor kormánybiztos, dr. Bodzási Balázs tanszékvezető (Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem), dr. Zsombolyay Péter főosztályvezető (IM) és dr. Fabók Zoltán ügyvéd (DLA Piper Hungary) fejtették ki álláspontjukat a folyamatban lévő kodifikáció egyes kérdéseivel kapcsolatban.
In brief...
The use of creditors’ schemes of arrangement is on the rise in Australia. Along the way the Australian courts have made valuable contributions to international scheme jurisprudence. In this article we look at some of these contributions and then explore how Australian law might be further developed to remain a leading jurisdiction for creditors’ schemes.
Advantages of schemes as a restructuring tool
In Canada v. Canada North Group Inc., 2019 ABCA 314, the Court of Appeal of Alberta (the “ABCA”) upheld the decision of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta (the “Lower Court”), which held that the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) permits courts to subordinate statutory deemed trusts in favour of the Crown to court-ordered insolvency priming charges.
Law 1676 of 2013 (Secured Interest Law), which came into effect in 2014, has substantially affected the legal scope of creditors’ rights in the context of insolvency proceedings (reorganization and liquidation). In particular, the law has potentially created a new type of creditor; the secured creditor, which has rights that differ from those creditors included in the creditor hierarchy in the Civil Code and the Corporate Insolvency Law.
In a world of multinational businesses, ever-changing consumer trends and political uncertainties, insolvencies and financial restructurings of a cross-border nature are a common occurrence. Officeholders therefore frequently need to consider options that allow, at the very least, recognition of their appointment in the jurisdictions where the insolvent debtor has (or had) operations, assets or other relevant connections.
This article appeared in Gulf Business on 22 June 2019
In a region where there has traditionally been an inherent stigma attached to business failure, the inevitable by-product is a decreased appetite for risk.
However, as the UAE’s economy has matured and become more global in its outlook, a more sophisticated and less risk-averse insolvency regime is required - one that can deal with volatile economic cycles and at the same time promote an entrepreneurial business environment.
On November 1, 2019, a number of amendments to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the “BIA”) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) will come into force pursuant to the Canadian federal government’s budget implementation legislation for 2018 and 2019.
The enactment of Law 1676 of 2013 (Secured Interest Law) in the context of insolvency proceedings − reorganization and liquidation − has substantially restated the legal scope of creditors’ rights in at least three aspects: (i) the existence or not of a new creditor type; (ii) the compatibility of that possible new type of creditor and the current system of creditors hierarchy, and (iii) the specific rights of that new creditor, should there be one, in creditors arrangement proceedings.
(i) Is the secured creditor a new type of creditor?