INTRODUCTION
India has been grappling with an increase in non-performing assets (NPA) and defaults of loans since at least the 1990s. As per recent reports, gross NPAs of public sector banks have doubled in the last 7 (seven) years, 1 which is indicative of the issues being faced by lenders against recalcitrant borrowers.
Facts
The Supreme Court of India (“SC”) in the judgment New Delhi Municipal Council v. Minosha India Limited, dated 27 April, 2022, Civil Appeal No. 3470 of 2022 has clarified the position on the applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963 (“Act”) and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).
Update unseres Leitfadens zum Umgang mit Materialkostenerhöhungen und Lieferverzögerungen
Die aktuelle Entwicklung bei Baukosten und Materiallieferungen
The English High Court has sanctioned Smile Telecom Holding Limited's (Smile) restructuring plan, despite there being no parallel restructuring proceedings in Mauritius, the place of Smile's incorporation.
Background
An increasing body of English case law has recognised cryptocurrencies as a form of property giving rise to the possibility of insolvency clawback claims involving cryptoassets.
Recent developments
Facts and Background
On 18 January 2022, Hong Kong-listed cruise operator Genting Hong Kong Limited ('Genting HK') filed for provisional liquidation with the Supreme Court of Bermuda after it failed to secure access to liquidity. Genting HK has since gone into liquidation.
Background
The temporary restrictions on the winding up of companies were lifted on 31 March 2022. This means the legal regime governing insolvency has returned to its pre-pandemic approach.
The pre-31 March position
Objective
The new preventive restructuring procedure aims to deal with companies in financial difficulty before serious problems arise. The measures focus on preventing the insolvency of businesses to preserve their viability.
Main characteristics
Background
Under German insolvency law, employees are generally protected from claw-back claims. The payment of wages is considered a "cash transaction" if the employer pays the salary within three months of the work being performed. A “cash transaction” can only be contested in limited circumstances. Where a third party pays the salary, the cash transaction privilege remains if it is not clear to the employee that a third party made the payment (s.142(2) and s.3 InsO).
A recent German Federal Court of Justice ruling shows that this protection has limits.