Fulltext Search

In a significant decision for the insurance industry, the Federal Court of Australia has granted leave to shareholders to bring a direct action against a company’s insurers where the (insured) company was in liquidation. This is one of the earliest cases to make use of the new Civil Liability (Third Party Claims Against Insurers) Act 2017 (NSW) (Third Party Claim Act), and provides some useful guidance for the industry on how this new legislation will be applied.

The decision impacts plaintiff lawyers, policyholders and insurers alike. Importantly:

上一篇我们谈到诉讼主体的确定问题,本文将从担保的视角对债券持有人的权利救济予以分析。

保证人单方出具《保证函》的效力

In the event of a contractual counterparty going into liquidation, whether or not a trade counterparty may claim set-off against debts owed to the insolvent counterparty can dramatically affect the commercial position of the account debtor. This was recently highlighted in the decision of Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd v Forge Group Power Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (Receivers and Managers appointed) [2017] WASC (2 June 2017).

What does this mean for you?

On 28 March 2017, the Turnbull Government released draft legislation which would implement wide-ranging reforms to Australia’s corporate restructuring laws. The draft legislation focuses on reforms to the insolvent trading prohibition (Safe Harbour) and introducing a new stay on enforcing “ipso facto” clauses during certain restructuring procedures (Ipso Facto).

新疆某上市公司(下称“公司”)因信息披露违规被中国证监会行政处罚,引发众多股民对公司提起证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼(下称“本案”),金杜代理公司应诉。近期,新疆某中级法院就本案作出一审判决,驳回股民全部诉讼请求。

本案系典型的证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼。该类案件因涉及股民众多、索赔金额高、专业性强,往往引发资本市场高度关注。从以往的案例来看,上市公司被行政处罚后引发的股民诉讼,法院判决驳回原告全部诉讼请求的案例极为罕见。本案中,金杜基于以往处理类似案件的丰富经验和专业把握,针对本案的案情特点,有针对性地提出了上市公司不应承担股民损失的答辩意见,最终得到法院支持。这是金杜代理上市公司成功应对股民提起证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼的又一经典案例。

案情简介

2014年7月,中国证监会作出《行政处罚决定书》,认定公司连续多年虚构购销业务,虚增业务收入与成本,虚增或者虚减利润,导致公司2006年至2011年年报存在信息披露违规问题。

截止目前,本案共有70余名股民对公司提起证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼,此外,还有批量股民以律师函的方式向公司进行索赔。

本案主要争议焦点及金杜整体应对思路

作为2016年整个航运界最震憾的事件,世界第七大集装箱航运商韩国韩进海运的破产案件最进又有了新进展。据外媒报道,在经历了近半年的重整努力后,2017年2月17日,韩国首尔中区法院正式裁定韩进海运破产。至此,这起航运史上最大的破产案件终于尘埃落定。据悉,韩进海运大部分的资产已经被拍卖用于偿债。

韩进海运在2016年9月进入重整程序后采取了哪些自救措施?这桩全球航运业有史以来最大的破产案涉及哪些航运企业跨境破产法律问题?我们将在下文逐一分析。

特殊的运营模式对航运企业的保护作用

为规避法律风险,现代航运企业多采取单船公司结构,单船公司之间彼此互不隶属。另外,除购买外,航运企业多采取租赁方式扩大商船运力。据报道,在韩进海运的全部运力中,仅有不足10%是由其自有船舶完成的。换言之,我们看到的航行在大洋上的、涂有HanJin Shipping字样的船舶里超过90%其实并不是韩进海运公司的财产。

What’s on the horizon? A focus on dispute resolution in the Year of the Rooster What's on the horizon? A focus on dispute resolution in the Year of the Rooster 1 What to expect in the Year of the Rooster In this bulletin we examine some of the key dispute resolution and regulatory challenges facing business managers, financial controllers, and in-house counsel in the Year of the Rooster. 1.

On 3 June 2016, the Supreme Court ruled that a valid right of pledge can be established on goods that are delivered subject to retention of title (of ownership). If the buyer is declared bankrupt, the conditional ownership can become an unconditional ownership if the condition precedent is fulfilled (mostly full payment of the purchase price). Next to the buyer, the pledgee can also fulfil this condition. As a consequence, these goods are not part of the bankrupt estate, so that the pledgee can take recourse against these goods.

The facts

Op 3 juni 2016 heeft de Hoge Raad geoordeeld dat er een geldig pandrecht kan worden gevestigd op zaken die onder eigendomsvoorbehoud zijn geleverd aan de koper. Indien de koper failliet wordt verklaard, kan het voorwaardelijke eigendomsrecht uitgroeien tot een onvoorwaardelijk eigendomsrecht door vervulling van de voorwaarde jegens de verkoper (veelal volledige betaling van de koopsom). Ook de pandhouder kan deze voorwaarde vervullen. Het gevolg hiervan is dat genoemde zaken niet in de faillissementsboedel vallen, maar dat de pandhouder hier verhaal op kan nemen.

In two months' time the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 will come into force (with effect from 6 April 2017). This date has been long in the making the first draft of the new rules was published in September 2013.

The new rules are not intended to change the law. Their main aim is to consolidate provisions in order to reduce repetition, ensure that there is a more logical structure and modernise and simplify the language (including gender neutral drafting).

This briefing highlights a few of the key changes.