The Queensland Court of Appeal has upheld an appeal by the liquidators of Linc Energy Limited (In Liquidation) (“Linc”) and given full effect to their disclaimer of contaminated mining property and onerous obligations the subject of an environmental protection order (“EPO”) issued by the Queensland Department of Environment and Science (“DES”).[1]
3月9日,最高人民法院院长周强在第十三届全国人大一次会议第二次全体会议上作最高人民法院工作报告,重点提及25个在过去五年中具有全国代表性并深具行业参考意义的大案要案,金杜代理的 “重庆钢铁破产重整案”、“东北特钢破产重整案”和“华为诉美国交互数字公司滥用市场支配地位案” 入选报告重点典型案件。
“东北特钢破产重整案:东北特钢重整之后两个月实现扭亏为盈,开启了民营控股的混合所有制运营新模式,为辽宁的国企改革提供了新路径。”
东北特钢破产重整案是近年来破产重整领域内出现的债务总额最高的案件之一,受到社会各方的高度关注。重整计划综合运用留债、一次性现金清偿、债转股等手段,妥善处理了逾七百亿元的债务问题。重整期间尊重当事方的意愿,运用市场的机制和手段,通过公开、公平、公正的程序遴选了重整投资人,得到了债权人的普遍认可。该案具有诸多创新之举,在重整投资人引进、关联公司整体重整、债权清偿方案设计、债转股等方面都进行了创新,为破产重整实践、立法完善和理论研究提供了成功的案例。
A paradigm shift is underway in Australian corporate restructuring.
Bold reforms are already in force which have changed the landscape for companies, their directors, creditors and other stakeholders.
From 1 July 2018, termination and other rights against companies in administration and other restructuring-related procedures will be unenforceable under the ipso facto reform.
Regulations are expected to have significant effect on the scope of the stay – these regulations are yet to be published.
Since the decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Re Independent [2016] NSWSC 106, there has been doubt about whether receivers and liquidators should apply the statutory priorities afforded to employee entitlements in sections 433, 561 and 556 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) when distributing the assets of companies who have conducted their businesses as trusts.
In January 2018, the Aviation Working Group (“AWG”)1 as part of its review of closing opinion practice, released a revised Form of Cape Town Convention Closing Opinion. The aim of the review was to provide further guidance and consistency in the approach legal practitioners adopt in respect of Cape Town and the State of Registry Jurisdiction.
The AWG was founded in 1994, with stated aims of contributing to the development and acceptance of policies and laws that:
facilitate advanced international aviation financing and leasing, and
In a significant decision for the insurance industry, the Federal Court of Australia has granted leave to shareholders to bring a direct action against a company’s insurers where the (insured) company was in liquidation. This is one of the earliest cases to make use of the new Civil Liability (Third Party Claims Against Insurers) Act 2017 (NSW) (Third Party Claim Act), and provides some useful guidance for the industry on how this new legislation will be applied.
The decision impacts plaintiff lawyers, policyholders and insurers alike. Importantly:
上一篇我们谈到诉讼主体的确定问题,本文将从担保的视角对债券持有人的权利救济予以分析。
保证人单方出具《保证函》的效力
In the event of a contractual counterparty going into liquidation, whether or not a trade counterparty may claim set-off against debts owed to the insolvent counterparty can dramatically affect the commercial position of the account debtor. This was recently highlighted in the decision of Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd v Forge Group Power Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (Receivers and Managers appointed) [2017] WASC (2 June 2017).
What does this mean for you?
On 28 March 2017, the Turnbull Government released draft legislation which would implement wide-ranging reforms to Australia’s corporate restructuring laws. The draft legislation focuses on reforms to the insolvent trading prohibition (Safe Harbour) and introducing a new stay on enforcing “ipso facto” clauses during certain restructuring procedures (Ipso Facto).
新疆某上市公司(下称“公司”)因信息披露违规被中国证监会行政处罚,引发众多股民对公司提起证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼(下称“本案”),金杜代理公司应诉。近期,新疆某中级法院就本案作出一审判决,驳回股民全部诉讼请求。
本案系典型的证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼。该类案件因涉及股民众多、索赔金额高、专业性强,往往引发资本市场高度关注。从以往的案例来看,上市公司被行政处罚后引发的股民诉讼,法院判决驳回原告全部诉讼请求的案例极为罕见。本案中,金杜基于以往处理类似案件的丰富经验和专业把握,针对本案的案情特点,有针对性地提出了上市公司不应承担股民损失的答辩意见,最终得到法院支持。这是金杜代理上市公司成功应对股民提起证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼的又一经典案例。
案情简介
2014年7月,中国证监会作出《行政处罚决定书》,认定公司连续多年虚构购销业务,虚增业务收入与成本,虚增或者虚减利润,导致公司2006年至2011年年报存在信息披露违规问题。
截止目前,本案共有70余名股民对公司提起证券虚假陈述民事赔偿诉讼,此外,还有批量股民以律师函的方式向公司进行索赔。
本案主要争议焦点及金杜整体应对思路