Fulltext Search

On 22 April 2015 the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the case of Jetivia SA and another v Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) and others [2015] UKSC 23, which was heard in October last year.  In short it decided that: 1) defendant directors cannot raise illegality as a defence to a claim by a company where the directors themselves acted wrongfully; and 2) a claim in fraudulent trading under Section 213 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (Section 213)has extra-territorial effect.

Background

In SwissMarineCorporation Ltd v OW Supply & Trading[1], the High Court refused to grant an anti-suit injunction restraining Danish insolvency proceedings. This case provides a useful discussion of the circumstances in which the court are likely to grant an anti-suit injunction, and in particular where there are jurisdiction issues involving elements of both civil and insolvency proceedings.

In the recent case of HMRC v Munir & Others[1], HMRC successfully applied to the Court for committal of three company officers for contempt of court where an order appointing a provisional liquidator was knowingly breached.

 Background

NEW REFORM OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 2 AMENDMENTS REGARDING REFINANCING AGREEMENTS 3 - NOTIFICATION OF THE START OF NEGOTIATIONS 3 - REFINANCING AGREEMENTS AND COURT APPROVAL 4 AMENDMENTS REGARDING COMPOSITION AGREEMENTS 4 - CONTENT OF THE COMPOSITION AGREEMENT 4 - QUORUM FOR THE CREATION OF THE CREDITORS’ MEETING AND CALCULATION OF MAJORITIES 5 AMENDMENTS REGARDING LIQUIDATION 5 AMENDMENTS REGARDING THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS 6 TELEMATIC COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC INSOLVENCY REGISTRY 7 LEGAL UPDATE I COMMERCIAL AND LITIGATION PRACTICE AREAS June 2015

ADVISORY | DISPUTES | TRANSACTIONS Financial Litigation roundup Spring 2015 Welcome to the latest edition of our Financial Litigation roundup. In this edition, we consider recent judgments and ongoing cases from the banking and financial world in the UK and Asia, as well as regulatory developments across those jurisdictions. English judgments SPL Private Finance (PF1) IC Limited and others v Arch Financial Products LLP and others; SPL Private Finance (PF2) IC Ltd and other v Robin Farrell. more> McWilliam v Norton Finance (UK) Ltd (in liquidation).

Removal of requirement for sanction

Previously under section 165 IA 86, liquidators in a voluntary winding up would have to seek sanction of the company (in members’ voluntary liquidation) or of the court or liquidation committee (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) in order to exercise their powers to pay debts, compromise claims etc. SBEEA removes this requirement so that liquidators can exercise those powers freely. This will aid expeditious winding up of companies. Equivalent provisions have also been put into place for trustees in bankruptcy.

财政部国家税务总局关于个人非货币性资产投资有关个人所得税政策的通知)

On March 30, 2015, the Ministry of Finance (“MoF”) and the SAT jointly released Caishui [2015] No. 41 (“Circular 41”) to expand nationwide the tax payment installment policy applicable in the Shanghai Free Trade Zone to income derived from non-monetary asset investment made by individuals.

Circular 41 defines non-monetary asset investment and includes the contribution of non-monetary assets to establish a new company, to participate in company capital increase, private placement of stock, stock exchange and corporate restructuring.

(财政部、国家税务总局关于进一步支持企业事业单位改制重组有关契税政策的通知)

Following  the  State  Council’s  call  to  introduce  policies  promoting  corporate restructuring in Guofa [2014] No. 14, MoF and SAT released Caishui [2015] No. 37 (“Circular 37”) to exempt from deed tax the transfer of land use rights and building ownership rights in the following corporate transactions:

In April 2013, the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) came into force, making the success fee applied to a Conditional Fee Arrangement (CFA), and the After the Event (ATE) insurance premiums, irrecoverable by a successful party to litigation proceedings.  However, under article 4 of LAPSO, there is an "insolvency exemption" making these costs recoverable by an insolvency practitioner.