Hong Kong is a common law jurisdiction, and its legal system is based on English law. Following Hong Kong’s handover to China on 1 July 1997, the Basic Law of Hong Kong is the constitutional document of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Article 8 of the Basic Law provides that: “laws previously in force in Hong Kong, that is, the common law, rules of equity, ordinances, subordinate legislation and customary law shall be maintained, except for any that contravene [the Basic Law], and subject to any amendment by the legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.”

The Privy Council has recently delivered a landmark judgment on the interplay between arbitration agreements and winding up petitions. The Board held that the English case of Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd v Altomart Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1575; Ch 589, which had adopted a pro-arbitration approach to stay or dismiss winding up petitions based on debts covered by arbitration agreements, even if the debts were not genuinely disputed on substantial grounds was wrongly decided.

On July 2, 2024, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (the “Court”) released its highly anticipated decision in British Columbia v. Peakhill Capital Inc., 2024 BCCA 246 (“Peakhill”) concerning the use of reverse vesting orders (“RVOs”) to effect sale transactions structured to avoid provincial property transfer taxes for the benefit of creditors.

Restructuring Corporate Groups: Transferring Employees under a Scheme

Intersnack Mid Co Pty Ltd(No. 2) [2024] NSWSC 9 ("Intersnack")

Restructuring or consolidating corporate groups may involve a new or different company in the group employing staff. In such a case an order can be made under s 413, Corporations Act ("CA") giving effect to that arrangement including where the staff are employed under an enterprise agreement.

1. Introducción

Este mes son prominentes los autos de homologación de planes de restructuración (en su mayoría no consensuales) que seguimos viendo. En ese mismo campo destacamos la desestimación de la impugnación del ya famoso plan de Torrejón Salud (plan con una única clase) que se ha instaurado como un "leading case" en la práctica. Los recurrentes son condenados en costas.

Todo esto y más resúmenes de resoluciones que nos han parecido interesantes a continuación.

2. Audiencias Provinciales

Many litigators and corporate lawyers view the practice of representing a large shareholder and the company in which it is invested as common practice. In many instances, no conflict of interest will ever materialize such that the shareholder and the company require separate representation. However, in a recent opinion rendered by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of Virginia (the “Court”), a large international law firm (the “Firm”) was disqualified from representing Enviva Inc.

Special Purpose Vehicles ("SPVs") – Financing Arrangements

Canstruct Pty Limited v Project Sea Dragon Pty Limited (No. 4) [2024] FCA 112 ("Canstruct")

SPVs are typically incorporated to undertake particular projects either for their holding company or on behalf of joint venturers. The arrangements made to fund the operations of SPVs can have implications for both their directors and their shareholders.

1. Introducción

Siguen siendo llamativas las homologaciones de planes de restructuración con apoyo de una ínfima mayoría del pasivo afectado. Este mes destacamos la homologación de un plan de restructuración para una microempresa aprobado por tan solo el 2,5% del pasivo con extensión de efectos al 97,5% restante.

Esta y otras resoluciones se resumen a continuación.

2. Tribunal Supremo

Due Diligence by Voluntary Administrators in respect of their Appointment

Robust Construction Services Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1156 ("Robust")

In its recent judgement of Foo Kian Beng v OP3 International Pte. Ltd. [2024] SGCA 10, the Singapore Court of Appeal laid down some key principles regarding the scope of directors' duties to creditors, i.e. the "creditor duty". These principles serve as useful guidance not just for directors to understand how they should discharge their duties but also for creditors seeking to hold directors to account. We set out some practical guidance for creditors on ensuring that directors discharge the "creditor duty".

What does the "creditor duty" of directors encompass?