Introduction
From a civil litigation and insolvency perspective, we look at the key impacts of the Hong Kong Courts’ recent General Adjournment of Proceedings (GAP) from 7 March 2022 to 11 April 2022 and related governmental closures.
Key Takeaways
1. The recent implementation of GAP has resulted in a de facto stay of new actions and proceedings, and adjournment of existing actions, including bankruptcy and winding-up petitions.
In the latest edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood's restructuring and insolvency team touches on the extent of the automatic stay arising from the recognition of a foreign main proceeding under the Singapore Model Law cross-border recognition regime, the requirements for a pre-pack scheme of arrangement under the recent Singapore Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018, and the importance of Environmental, Social and Governance ("ESG") in the restructuring context.
Contents
In brief
The courts were busy in the second half of 2021 with developments in the space where insolvency law and environmental law overlap.
In Victoria, the Court of Appeal has affirmed the potential for a liquidator to be personally liable, and for there to be a prospective ground to block the disclaimer of contaminated land, where the liquidator has the benefit of a third-party indemnity for environmental exposures.1
In brief
The Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Act ("Act") received royal assent on 15 December 2021.
The Act extends the scope of powers available to the Insolvency Service to address the issue of directors dissolving companies to avoid paying their liabilities.
In brief
The Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Act ("Act") received royal assent on 15 December 2021.
The Act extends the scope of powers available to the Insolvency Service to address the issue of directors dissolving companies to avoid paying their liabilities.
An important decision for employers and administrators has been handed down by the High Court in the case of R (Palmer, Forsey) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court [2021] EWHC 3013. The Judgment acts as a stark reminder to employers and company personnel about the criminal liability they can face for failing to notify the Secretary of State of proposed collective redundancies as well as confirming that that an administrator can be prosecuted personally.
Background
The High Court, in its recent judgment In the matter of ipagoo LLP (in administration) [2021] EWHC 2163 (Ch) (Ipagoo), has determined that no statutory trust exists over safeguarded funds held under the Electronic Money Regulations 2011 (EMRs). This can be contrasted with the decision In Re Supercapital [2020] EWHC 1685 (Ch) (Supercapital) which found that the Payment Services Regulations 2017 (PSRs) create a statutory trust over safeguarded funds.
海航集团有限公司（于中国内地重整） [2021] HKCFI 2897（裁决日期：2021 年 9 月 16 日）
前言
海航集团有限公司（一家总部设在海南的大型企业，下称“公司”）的内地重整程序最近在香港获得认可。这是香港法院首次向 内地重整程序的破产管理人颁发认可令的案例。