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?

In a recent application for directions from the High Court, the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement (the “ODCE”) brought a motion to compel a liquidator contest an appeal by directors of a restriction order made against them in the High Court.

Section 683 of the Companies Act 2014 (“CA14”) requires the liquidator of an insolvent company to apply for an Order restricting the directors. It does not require liquidator to contest an appeal by directors. The ODCE ultimately withdrew the application and paid costs, but the application raises concerns for all liquidators.

EY's Hunter Kelly and Alan Hudson have been appointed administrators over UK construction services company Interserve, hours after it failed to secure shareholder approval for a restructuring plan.  

Kelly and Hudson were appointed over Interserve Plc, the holding company for the Interserve Group, on 15 March after the plan failed to win approval at a shareholders' general meeting earlier the same day. 

Singapore’s new restrictions on ipso facto clauses are welcome news to the local restructuring community, and a strong step towards establishing it as one of the region’s premier restructuring hubs. But how will these restrictions affect innocent counterparties and existing commercial contracts, ask partner Guan Feng Chen and associate Jonathan Tang at Morgan Lewis Stamford?

New restrictions on ipso facto clauses

The sale of gift vouchers and their terms and conditions is largely unregulated in Ireland.

Although there is no specific legislation, gift vouchers provided to consumers are subject to the provisions of general consumer protection legislation, such as the Consumer Protection Act 2007.

Gift vouchers that cover a wide range of traders and retailers such as the “All4One” vouchers come within the definition of “electronic money” in the European Communities (Electronic Money) Regulations 2011 are subject to the provisions of those Regulations.

Coast Stores, the occasional wear retailer and high street stallworth has gone into administration in the UK.

Coast’s sister brand Karen Millen had partially rescued the company, buying its department store concessions arm, website, safe guarding up to 600 jobs. However, as part of a pre pack administration deal, it will not be maintaining Coasts overseas stores or its UK high-street stores.

Kiely Rowan plc the company which owns the business of Irish designer Orla Kiely went into liquidation last week. The retailer closed its online shop as well as one in Kildare Village and two in London. This is very sad for the employees and customers of Orla Kiely as well as her creditors.

However, what does it mean when one hears that a company has gone into liquidation?

House of Fraser, the struggling UK department store has gone into administration but is to be acquired by billionaire Mike Ashley, the owner of Sports Direct. There are regulatory difficulties with his acquisition of the Dundrum branch at the moment, but it is anticipated that the entire group including Dundrum will be fully operational in good time to capitalise on the Christmas market.

However, what does this mean for customers with unused gift cards?

A recent case in the UK (Phones 4U Limited -v- EE Limited) serves as a warning to businesses of the unintended, and potentially costly, consequences of issuing inadequate termination notices to contractual counterparties.

Background