Generally speaking, the most appropriate jurisdiction in which to wind up a company is the jurisdiction where the company is incorporated, and the jurisdiction to wind up a foreign company has often been described as exorbitant or as usurping the functions of the courts of the country of incorporation.
The case of Wing Hong Construction Limited v Hui Chi Yung and Ors [2017] HKEC 1173 provides an overview of the legal principles which apply to an application for security for costs, where the Plaintiff against whom security is sought is a company and the application is made under section 905 of the Companies Ordinance (Cap 622). This was an appeal against the decision of a Master who had dismissed the Defendant’s application for security for costs against the Plaintiff which was a private company in liquidation. The appeal was allowed and security for costs of HK$2 million ordered.
In Re Lucky Resources (HK) Ltd [2016] 4 HKLRD 301, Hong Kong’s Court of First Instance had to consider the question of whether an arbitration award could be enforced by winding up the company against which the award had been made, without first applying for leave to enforce the award under section 84 of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609). The Court answered that question in the affirmative.
No passado dia 1 de julho de 2017 entrou em vigor o Decreto-lei 79/2017 de 30 de junho de 2017 (“DL 79/2017”), que altera, entre outros, o Código da Insolvência e da Recuperação de Empresas, alterando, nomeadamente, o regime jurídico do Procedimento Especial de Revitalização (“PER”) que fica agora reservado a empresas.
Destacamos ainda outras alterações relevantes introduzidas pelo DL 79/2017:
On 1 July 2017, Decree-law 79/2017, of 30 June 2017 (“DL 79/2017”), entered into force. This piece of legislation amends, most notably, the Insolvency and Recovery of Companies Code and the legal framework of the Special Revitalization Procedure (“SRP”), which is now reserved only to companies.
Other noteworthy amendments introduced by DL 79/2017 are as follows:
La Dirección General de Tributos, en dos recientes consultas vinculantes, concreta el momento en el que los propietarios de acciones de una sociedad en concurso de acreedores pueden computar las pérdidas patrimoniales experimentadas con motivo de tal situación.
La Dirección General de Tributos, en la consulta vinculante V0624-17, de 9 de marzo del 2017, analiza cuándo y cómo puede computar una pérdida patrimonial el propietario de unas acciones de una sociedad suspendida de cotización y en fase de liquidación en un procedimiento concursal.
Article 92 of the Spanish Insolvency Act (SIA) sets forth that claims held by related parties shall qualify as subordinated in the event of insolvency of the debtor.
La operación sobre los activos de una empresa que se prepara con anterioridad a la declaración de quiebra para ser ejecutada inmediatamente después de que se declare la quiebra (pre-pack) puede plantear problemas laborales.
Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia (Sala Cuarta) de 9 de marzo de 2017 (petición de decisión prejudicial planteada por el tribunal administratif de Rennes — Francia) — Doux SA, en concurso de acreedores/Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)
(Asunto C-141/15)
[Procedimiento prejudicial — Reglamento (CE) n.o 543/2008 — Artículo 15, apartado 1 — Artículo 16 — Pollos congelados y ultracongelados — Límite máximo del contenido de agua
— Obsolescencia de este límite — Modalidades prácticas de los controles — Segundo análisis