Fernando Daniel Hernandez, Marval O’Farrell & Mairal
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
The Personal Insolvency Act 2012 was enacted with the aim of throwing a lifeline to debtors, many of whom may be in arrears on mortgage loans secured against their principal private residence.
“To achieve great things, two things are needed: a plan, and not quite enough time.” – Leonard Bernstein
To paraphrase, great things happen when there is a plan and a deadline.
Examinership is one of Ireland’s key rescue processes for insolvent companies. It has been used successfully in very many cases since its introduction almost 20 years ago.
Crucially, it encompasses a deadline with no flexibility.
100 days
Less than an hour after an oxygen tank exploded on Apollo 13, mission control told the crew to isolate a small tank, containing 3.9 pounds of oxygen.[1] Days later, that tank provided the oxygen to keep the crew alive while landing back on Earth.
If they had left that tank for even another hour the oxygen in it would have been almost gone.
The recent publication of the Courts Service Annual Report 2018 highlighted on-going economic and societal changes by way of hard data. In his Foreword to the Report, Chief Justice Frank Clarke references our digital age, noting that “people are used to round-the-clock online access to services”. He adds that the courts “must deal with the twin challenge of facilitating such access while at the same time ensuring that the court process is secure and that cases are allocated the time and consideration they require”.
The default setting for the hearing of many contested debt recovery and security enforcement cases is by way of affidavit evidence, particularly in the High Court[1]. The creditor swears an affidavit setting out the reasons why it maintains the court should rule in its favour. Certain documents can be presented as exhibits that back up its case such as a contract.
It is now well documented that many owners’ management companies are facing the prospect of litigating to recover the cost of remedial works for defective developments or passing the cost onto the owners themselves. Given the passage of time since the construction of the developments and the insolvency of many of the developers and contractors involved in those projects following the financial crisis, management companies often face an uphill battle to recover damages.
The appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution has generally been considered a “remedy of last resort”[1] and, for over a hundred years, courts have expressed differing views as to when they could appoint such a receiver.
The judicial managers of offshore oil and gas group Swiber have announced a restructuring plan for the company – which includes handing over shares to its professional services providers in part-payment of fees.
Judicial managers Bob Yap Cheng Ghee, Ong Pang Thye and Tay Puay Cheng of KPMG published the plan on 7 May, urging creditors to vote in favour to avoid Swiber’s liquidation.
Hong Kong’s restructuring scene is one of the most cross-border in the world, with three-quarters of its listed companies incorporated offshore and most restructurings having a mainland China connection. But the territory still lacks a statutory regime for cross-border recognition – as recently brought into focus in the restructuring of Singaporean engineering company CW Group. What does this mean for international insolvencies in the region?