In its recent decision in Net International Property Limited v Erez, the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal considered whether the BVI Courts had jurisdiction at common law to recognize an insolvency office-holder appointed in the courts of Israel, and whether and to what extent the BVI Courts could grant assistance to that office-holder at common law.

In the Representation of Matthew David Smith and Ors. [2021] JRC 047 the Royal Court of Jersey has handed down an important decision, exercising its discretion to grant a moratorium in substantially the same terms as provided under the UK Insolvency Act 1986.

In this article, consultant John Greenfield, partner David Jones and associate Steven Balmer, examine innovative mechanisms by which creditors may seek to investigate secure assets held in Guernsey structures. In the second part of the article, the authors look particularly at companies and how the traditional insolvency regimes may be employed in aid of creditors but also at how the use of share security may unlock certain doors.

Recognition of UK insolvencies in Europe after Brexit[1] is navigating uncertain waters. Following the completion of Brexit, the UK has left parts of the EU's private international law realm, including the application of Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 on Insolvency proceedings (the EU Insolvency Regulation). Therefore, since January this year, any reciprocal statutory cooperation in insolvency law matters between the UK and the EU has ceased.

It was only a matter of time. On January 12, 2021, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that it had reached its first civil settlement regarding allegations of fraud related to the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”).¹ DOJ settled a $4.2 million claim against a bankrupt internet retailer and its president for $100,000. Although unique to the case’s specific allegations, the settlement reveals activities that may be alleged as PPP fraud, statutes at DOJ’s disposal to pursue civil enforcement, and terms by which DOJ will resolve PPP fraud allegations.

This legal guide summarises the scope of directors’ duties when a British Virgin Islands company encounters financial difficulties.

Introduction

This legal guide should be read in conjunction with the legal guide entitled “Duties of a director under British Virgin Islands Law” which describes in further detail the duties which British Virgin Islands law imposes on a director generally.

While it had been clear for most of the recent economic downturn that the 24% of Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKSE) listed companies incorporated in Bermuda may have recourse to the court in their place of incorporation to secure an adjournment or stay of an actual or anticipated winding up petition in Hong Kong, it is now equally clear that Cayman incorporated companies (which represent another 50% of the HKSE) will have similar access to restructuring assistance.

This briefing note provides an overview of some of the commercial reasons for and the technical legal requirements of a company wishing to acquire its own shares (also referred to as “share buy-backs”).

It is common for E&P companies in chapter 11 to seek to reject burdensome midstream contracts under Bankruptcy Code § 365. Rejection has not been permitted by bankruptcy courts where such agreements create enforceable covenants running with the land (“CRWL”) because a CRWL is a real property interest of the midstream gatherer, not just a contract right. Accordingly, before a debtor can seek to reject midstream agreements, the bankruptcy court must first determine whether an enforceable CRWL exists.

Statutory demands are often conflated with other debt recovery mechanisms available to creditors. Whilst a statutory demand may, in certain circumstances, be a useful tool in the debt recovery kit, its primary function is to establish whether a company can pay its debts as they fall due i.e. whether it satisfies the “cash flow test”.

In Guernsey, a company must pass both the cash flow and balance sheet solvency tests to meet the definition of solvency.