A recent High Court case has provided welcome clarity for LPA and fixed charge receivers as to the scope of their duty of good faith and potential conflicts of interest. Walker Morris’ Housing Management & Litigation Partner Karl Anders and Banking, Restructuring and Insolvency Director Owen Ormond explain.
Why is this case of interest?
HMRC has issued a consultation on the announcement in last year’s Budget to introduce legislation to restore HMRC’s position as a secondary preferential creditor in company insolvencies. This may impact upon pension schemes.
Re Kaoru Takamatsu – [2019] HKCFI 802 (date of judgment 25 March 2019)
For the first time the Hong Kong Court has recognised a Japanese winding up proceeding and granted assistance to a bankruptcy trustee appointed by the Japanese Court.
Background
On 1 March 2018, the District Court of Tokyo, Twentieth Civil Division (“Tokyo Court”) ordered Japan Life Co, Ltd (“Japan Life”) to be wound up and appointed Mr Kaoru Takamatsu as trustee in bankruptcy.
有关Kaoru Takamatsu – [2019] HKCFI 802一案 (判决日期2019年3月25日)
香港法庭首次认可日本清盘程序，并向日本法庭委任的破产管理人提供援助。
背景介绍
于2018年3月1日，东京地区裁判法院民事诉讼第20支部向Japan Life Co, Ltd (以下简称“Japan Life”) 颁发清盘令，并委任Kaoru Takamatsu先生为破产管理人。
Takamatsu先生需要获取Japan Life在瑞穗银行及汇丰银行的香港分行所持有的银行账户记录。于是，Takamatsu先生寻求香港法庭的认可和援助，以获得该账户的记录，并处理Japan Life在香港的相关事务。
判定和原则
Under the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement, following an event of default, there is either an automatic termination or the non-defaulting party can serve a notice designating an Early Termination Date. There then has to be a determination by the non-defaulting party of the compensation that is owed by one party or the other. This is done by closing out the transactions, which involves determining gains or losses in replacing or providing the economic equivalent of the terminated transactions. Once that is done, a statement is served setting out the calculations.
Welcome to this month's edition of our commercial and tech update, covering a wide range of topics from Facebook's lacklustre approach in dealing with IP infringement to further confirmation on the Courts' approach to liquidated damages.
(Mis)Adventures in advertising
Welcome to the inaugural edition of 'Going concerns', in which we strive to bring you the latest updates on restructuring and insolvency law. For this issue, we focus on Singapore and provide:
There have been a number of recent instances, including this year, of quoted companies calling general meetings to seek shareholder approval to remedy dividends that were paid unlawfully. Invariably these have been for non-compliance with a statutory formality rather than because the company did not have sufficient distributable profits to make the dividend.
Why are companies prepared to suffer the embarrassment and expense of going to their shareholders to fix the breach rather than simply doing nothing?
The Court of Appeal has reiterated some important rules for funders involved in debt purchase. Banking Litigation specialist Alasdair Urwin looks at the recent case of Bibby Factors Northwest v HDF and MCD [1].
Buyer beware
This case concerned a factoring agreement, pursuant to which a funder (Bibby) purchased unpaid invoices from another company (the Assignor), including debts owing from the defendant companies (the Customers).
In Stevensdrake Ltd v Hunt and others [1] the liquidator of Sunbow Limited, Mr Hunt, had brought a claim against Sunbow's former administrators. Mr Hunt entered into a conditional fee agreement (CFA) with the solicitors instructed to pursue the claim (Stevensdrake). The CFA stated "if you [Mr Hunt] win your claim, you pay our basic charges, our disbursements and a success fee". A settlement was agreed but one of the former administrators failed to pay the agreed sum.