——新修订将如何影响上市公司重组
作为打击壳股活动的一系列举措之一,香港联合交易所有限公司(以下简称“联交所”)修订了《香港联合交易所有限公司证券上市规则》(以下简称“《上市规则》”)中的大量条文,并发布了相关指引信。最新修订的条文于2019年10月1日生效,修订主要关于借壳上市和持续上市准则有关。其他已于2018年开始生效修订的条文与除牌机制和融资规则有关。除此之外,联交所逐渐加强了对新上市申请人的上市适合性审查。尽管这些修订主要针对壳股活动,但是也会影响其他重组活动,包括上市公司破产重组。
我们将在本文中分享对上述修订及其对上市公司破产重组的影响的看法。本文不讨论《上市规则》中所有经过修订的条文,仅关注某些会影响上市公司重组的特定条文。
除牌制度
在2018年8月以前,根据《上市规则》第17项应用指引的规定,除牌程序由三阶段组成。但在2018年8月以后,除牌程序简单化,上市公司持续停牌18个月,联交所即可将其除牌。
Da Yu Financial Holdings Limited (formerly known as China Agrotech Holdings Limited) (in liquidation) [2019] HKCFI 2531 (date of judgment 17 October 2019)
Introduction
Welcome to the 3rd edition of Going Concerns where we strive to bring you the latest updates on restructuring and insolvency law. In this issue, we provide:
1. An update on the extent of financial disclosure that may be ordered against a company undergoing a scheme moratorium under s. 211B(6) of the Singapore Companies Act (Cap. 50);
2. A further commentary on the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Bill; 3. A commentary on the Singapore recognition process of foreign bankruptcies;
How the recent changes will impact restructurings of listed companies
The equitable doctrine of marshalling can protect the security interests of subordinate secured creditors when a debtor becomes insolvent.
Marshalling is a neglected tool in the insolvency toolbox, but it can play an important role in protecting the security interests of subordinate secured creditors.
In Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB v Conway & another [2019] UKPC 36, the Privy Council upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands that the appellant bank, SEB, was required to repay redemption payments held to be preferences notwithstanding that it had received the funds in the capacity of nominee, and had already distributed the funds to the beneficiaries without any ability to recover them.
Facts
Directors are first and foremost responsible to the company as a whole and must exercise their powers and discharge their duties in good faith in the best interests of the company and for a proper purpose. The reference to "acting in the best interests of the company" has generally been interpreted to mean the collective financial interests of the shareholders.
Payment of priority creditors under section 561 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) is an activity conventionally performed by liquidators, albeit the section is silent as to the holder of the relevant payment obligation. The Federal Court of Australia has recently confirmed that distributions to priority (employee) creditors are not the exclusive purview of liquidators (where receivers are appointed contemporaneously); receivers may exercise the powers contained in section 561 to distribute certain funds to such priority creditors.
Forum bias, along with some technical issues, are still challenges in cross-border insolvencies in Australia
Just over ten years ago, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy in the US, which turned out to be one of the largest cross-border insolvency cases in history.
Last year also marks:
It is inevitable that companies will face periods of financial distress during their corporate lives. During these times, it is incumbent on the directors and management to seek to maximise the company's chances of survival and preserve value for stakeholders. Certainly it has not been uncommon for directors to use the threat of voluntary administration as a part of their stakeholder management strategy during these times.