Chul Man Kim, Ki Young Kim, Sun Kyoung Kim, Su Yeon Lee, Jin Seok Choi and Sy Nae Kim, Yulchon LLC
This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's the Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Debby Sulaiman, Hiswara Bunjamin & Tandjung
This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's the Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Abhishek Tripathi and Mani Gupta, Sarthak Advocates & Solicitors
This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's the Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Nuo Ji, Lingqi Wang and Jessica Li, Fangda Partners
This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's the Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
This is part three of a series focusing on current M&A trends, opportunities and challenges
This is the first part of a two-part series
Commercial tenant bankruptcies and COVID-19
In the recent decision of British Columbia Attorney General v Quinsam Coal Corporation, 2020 BCSC 640 (Quinsam), the British Columbia Supreme Court (the Court) considered the priority between a debtor’s environmental liabilities and a secured creditor. In its analysis, the Court extensively discussed the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Ltd, 2019 SCC 5 (Redwater). In reference to Redwater, the Court posed the following question:
In Toronto-Dominion Bank v Canada,1 the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) upheld the Federal Court’s decision2 that the Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD) was required to pay to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) proceeds of $67,854 for unremitted GST that TD received as repayment from a borrower upon the discharge of a TD mortgage.
On May 8, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) released its reasons for the decision rendered in 9354-9816 Québec Inc. et al. v. Callidus Capital Corporation, et al on January 23, 2020. The SCC unanimously allowed the appeal from the Québec Court of Appeal’s decision, reinstating an order allowing third-party litigation funding in insolvency proceedings.
Background
These are unprecedented and uncertain times. Everywhere, the COVID-19 pandemic has strained revenue streams and asset prices, shaken investor and consumer confidence, and caused overall financial conditions to deteriorate. Everyone is asking the same question: How do we deal with the financial fallout of COVID-19?
In many cases, parties are working together to overcome these financial challenges, preserve value and navigate a mutually beneficial path forward.