The Supreme Court of Canada delivered its reasons today in 9354-9186 Québec inc. v Callidus Capital Corp., 2020 SCC 10, after having unanimously allowed the appeals from the bench on January 9, 2020. Davies represented the principal – and successful – appellants in this matter.1
In its reasons, which were delivered by Chief Justice Wagner and Justice Moldaver, the Supreme Court laid out key principles for the conduct of insolvency proceedings (including proceedings under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act [CCAA]):
With COVID-19 causing ever increasing financial uncertainty around the globe, we thought it an apt time to provide you with a summary of the various corporate insolvency procedures in the UK applicable to companies facing financial difficulties. Taking each in turn, we will discuss administration, administrative receivership, company voluntary arrangements, schemes of arrangement and liquidation. We will also touch briefly on directors’ duties, rules relating to asset distribution on insolvency and transactions that may be set aside on insolvency or ‘reviewable’ transactions.
With COVID-19 causing ever increasing financial uncertainty around the globe, we thought it an apt time to provide you with a summary of the various corporate insolvency procedures in the UK applicable to companies facing financial difficulties. Taking each in turn, we will discuss administration, administrative receivership, company voluntary arrangements, schemes of arrangement and liquidation. We will also touch briefly on directors’ duties, rules relating to asset distribution on insolvency and transactions that may be set aside on insolvency or ‘reviewable’ transactions.
随着新冠肺炎疫情在全球范围内持续引发财务不确定性,我们认为是时候简要介绍英国法适用于陷入财务困境的公司的各种公司破产程序。下文将依次讨论管理程序 (administration)、接管程序 (administrative receivership)、公司自愿安排 (company voluntary arrangement)、债务偿还安排 (schemes of arrangement) 和破产清算 (liquidation)。此外,还将简述董事职责、有关破产中资产分配的规则以及在破产中可撤销或“可审查”的交易。
在本专业概要发文之前,英国商务、能源与产业战略部于2020年3月28日发布公告,旨在帮助处于破产拯救或重整程序中的公司继续开展交易,避免破产。简言之,英国商务大臣宣布:
Traduction en cours.
As part of its economic response to the COVID-19 pandemic, yesterday the Government passed a ‘temporary safe harbour’ insolvency measure[1].
受OPEC与俄罗斯减产谈判进展及后续措施影响,3月9日开市以来原油价格强劲下行,连带其他相关大宗商品价格以同样惊人的幅度大幅下跌,朋友圈纷纷感叹“活久见”。2020年初的黑天鹅接踵而至,很难判断下一站的走势到底在哪,也难判断对国内期货等金融市场的传导究竟会到何种程度。在这个价格剧烈波动的日子,人们耳边又回响起华尔街故老相传的”Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered” 的残酷谚语。在目前中国境内证券期货市场中,和做空手段相对有限的股票市场相比,期货市场天然的多头-空头交易机制可以更直观的展现这句话的涵义。
1、当我们在谈论“强行平仓”和“三板强平”时,我在谈些什么?
期货交易的亏损并不仅指强行平仓带来的损失,但是面对如此惊人的市场变化,“爆仓”、“强行平仓”和“三板强平”这类期货术语或行话还是最让人屏住呼吸的字眼。与肾上腺素飙升,杀伐决断的Trader们以及或焦虑或欣慰的相关企业的关注点不同,作为律师的我们,视线停在了这些期货术语或行话背后的基础法律关系上。从机制本身出发:
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in 9354-9186 Québec Inc. v Callidus Capital Corporation unanimously overturned a unanimous decision of the Québec Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court’s decision, released on January 23, 2020, was issued from the bench with reasons to follow.
Dans une décision unanime rendue séance tenante le 23 janvier 2020 dans l’affaire 9354-9186 Québec Inc. c. Callidus Capital Corporation, la Cour suprême du Canada a infirmé une décision unanime de la Cour d’appel du Québec. Les motifs de la Cour sont à venir.
This article was first published in the Global Restructuring Review, 14 Jan 2020.