Fulltext Search

2017年1月07日,在《人民法院报》最新公布的 “2016年度人民法院十大民事行政案件”中,金杜律师事务所代理的江苏舜天船舶股份有限公司(简称“舜天船舶”)破产重整案名列其中。该案不仅是适用最高人民法院和证监会之间会商机制的首个案例,也是上市公司重整同时完成重大资产重组的首个案例,在案件处理的参考性以及对于市场和社会的整体影响方面均意义重大。每年由《人民法院报》编辑部评出的十大案件均为在过去一年中全国各级法院审判的具有重大社会影响力、案情疑难复杂或审判结果有重大突破和借鉴作用的典型案件。

舜天船舶是一家从事船舶和非船舶贸易的国有控股上市公司。受航运及船舶市场持续低迷的影响,自2014年起舜天船舶的经营危机和债务危机开始显现,且日趋严重,渐至资不抵债,面临严峻的退市风险。最终舜天船舶于2016年2月5日被南京市中级人民法院(简称“南京中院”)裁定进入破产重整程序。南京中院通过公开选任方式,经过层层选拔,最终确定金杜为本案管理人,负责开展相关重整工作。

The insolvency profession (and the Queensland market in particular) has been abuzz this year with the issue of CORA – a shorthand reference to theEnvironmental Protection (Chain of Responsibility) Amendment Act 2016 (Qld).

What does it mean for insolvency practitioners? Can banks really be hit with a bill to clean up their borrowers’ environmental damage? Will turnaround and restructuring professionals refuse to accept appointments out of fear of falling foul of the new regime?

This post explains what you need to know.

An insolvent enterprise incorporated in Mainland China (“PRC”) or its creditors (“Applicant”) may institute a bankruptcy proceeding against the insolvent enterprise under the PRC Enterprise Bankruptcy Law (“Bankruptcy Law”) by the filing of a bankruptcy petition. There have long been complaints by industry practitioners that PRC courts are reluctant to register bankruptcy petitions.

任何在中国内地(“”)注册成立的企业,如不能清偿到期债务,并且资产不足以清偿全部债务或者明显缺乏清偿能力的,可由该企业或其债权人(“”)提交破产申请,继而根据《中华人民共和国企业破产法》(“《破产法》”)对该企业发起破产法律程序。但是,长期以来,备受业内人士诟病的是,中国法院迟迟未对破产申请实施立案登记制度。在此背景下,最高人民法院(“”)于2016年7月颁布指导通知[1](“《2016年最高院通知》”),旨在简化和规范登记破产案件的立案受理工作。

最高院通知:优化立案程序

‘Shipping steel, shipping steel . . .
Nobody knows, the way it feels
Caught between Heaven and the Highway
Shipping steel, shipping steel . . .’ 1

On 7 April 2016, Administrators were appointed to South Australian-based steelmaker and iron ore miner Arrium, which reportedly owed approximately AUD4.3 billion to its lenders, suppliers and staff. The appointment covered 94 direct and indirect subsidiaries of Arrium Limited (the Arrium Companies), which at the time employed around 8,100 employees and contractors.

The High Court this afternoon unanimously dismissed Clive Palmer and Ian Ferguson's challenge to the constitutional validity of section 596A of the Corporations Act.

This means that a liquidator's power to publicly examine and compel the production of documents remains intact and removes any doubt about the powers of liquidators under section 596A of the Corporations Act.

Arguments made by Clive Palmer and Ian Ferguson

Unscrupulous advisors, unconscionably preying on desperate directors driven by the fear of losing everything, have created a boom in illegal phoenix activity. The below article, originally published on the McCullough Robertson white collar crime blog, Collared, sheds some light on the illegal phoenix, the gravity of the problem in Australia and considers what is being done to monitor and control the issue.

In August I presented on cross-border insolvency at the joint Federal Court of Australia and Law Council of Australia conference on corporations law. The audience consisted of over 30 Federal Court judges and a range of other experienced corporate and insolvency lawyers.

There have been recent reports that APR Energy PLC has threatened the Australian Government with a demand for $200 million in damages based on a claim under the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement after it lost its security interest in multi-million dollar wind turbines it leased to an Australian company due to the operation of a provision in the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth) (PPSA).

On Friday 7 October 2016, McCullough Robertson successfully obtained orders on behalf of a US Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee, requiring payment to her of money held by the Public Trustee of Queensland (Public Trustee) on behalf of a US bankrupt and her former husband. As far as we know, this is the first time that the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (Model Law) has been used in Australia to obtain an order allowing the repatriation of funds to a foreign representative that are not the foreign debtor’s assets.