海航集团有限公司（于中国内地重整） [2021] HKCFI 2897（裁决日期：2021 年 9 月 16 日）
前言
海航集团有限公司（一家总部设在海南的大型企业，下称“公司”）的内地重整程序最近在香港获得认可。这是香港法院首次向 内地重整程序的破产管理人颁发认可令的案例。
In Anchorage Capital Master Offshore Ltd v Sparkes (No 3); Bank of Communications Co Ltd v Sparkes (No 2),[1] the NSW Supreme Court handed down judgment in two proceedings (which were heard together) arising from the failure of Arrium and its broader corporate group.
Grand Peace Group Holdings Limited [2021] HKCFI 2361 (Date of Decision: 24 August 2021)
Up Energy Development Group Limited [2021] HKCFI 2595 (Date of Decision: 31 August 2021)
Introduction
The vast majority of listed companies in Hong Kong are incorporated offshore, with a corporate structure that the operating and asset owning subsidiaries in Mainland China are held through intermediate subsidiaries incorporated in offshore jurisdictions such as BVI and Cayman Islands etc.
In LCM Operations Pty Ltd, in the matter of 316 Group Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) [2021] FCA 324, the Federal Court considered whether a third party who has been assigned a company’s claim by a liquidator breached the Harman undertaking with respect to documents obtained through public examinations.
What happened?
Section 440A(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act) requires the Court to adjourn a winding up application if it is satisfied that it would be in the best interest of creditors for the company to continue under administration rather than be wound up.
Hughes, in the matter of Substar Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (No. 2) (Substar No. 2) considers the Court’s discretionary power to terminate the winding up of a company pursuant to s 482(1) of the Corporations Act 2001. Substar No. 2 follows the decision of Hughes, in the matter of Substar Holdings Pty Ltd (in liquidation) [2020] FCA 1863(Substar (No. 1), which considered the extent to which liquidators can realise trust assets when a corporate trustee enters into liquidation.
The High Court has, for the first time since the introduction of the legislation in June 2020, refused to sanction a cross-class cram-down restructuring plan under Part 26A of the Companies Act. In In the matter of Hurricane Energy Plc [2021] EWHC 1759 (Ch), the court rejected a plan supported by bondholders because it had not been shown that the opposing shareholders had no better alternative prospects (i.e., the ‘no worse off condition’ had not been met).
Samson Paper Company Limited (In Creditors' Voluntary Liquidation) [2021] HKCFI 2151(date of decision: 20 July 2021)
China All Access (Holdings) Limited [2021] HKCFI 1842 (date of decision: 21 June 2021)
Introduction
In Re Dessco Pty Ltd, the Victorian Supreme Court adjourned a winding up application for 50 days to allow time for creditors to vote on a restructuring plan.
Whilst the adjournment was opposed by the Plaintiff, the Judicial Registrar of the Court accepted the assessment formed by the Small Business Restructuring Practitioner that the company was eligible to avail itself of the new regime having regard to the criteria that must be satisfied (and the ‘just estimate’ approach adopted in respect of contingent liabilities) and the interests of the company’s creditors.