Up Energy Development Group Limited [2022] HKCFI 1329 (date of decision: 6 May 2022)
Introduction
The 3 core requirements are factors considered by the Hong Kong Court when deciding whether to exercise its discretion to wind up a foreign incorporated company in Hong Kong.
The issue
A "no action" clause will appear in almost all English law-governed bond trust deeds.
A no action clause provides that a bondholder (or anyone entitled to payments on the bonds) cannot, initially, proceed directly against the issuer. Instead, the right to bring a cause of action resides with the trustee and it is only if the trustee, having become bound to take action, fails to do so within a reasonable time (with the failure continuing) that a bondholder can then itself proceed directly against the issuer.
Ozner Water International Holding Limited (In Liquidation) [2022] HKCFI 363 (date of decision: 27 January 2022)
Hong Kong Fresh Water International Group Limited (In Liquidation) [2022] HKCFI 924 (date of decision: 6 April 2022)
Introduction
In the latest edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood's restructuring and insolvency team touches on the extent of the automatic stay arising from the recognition of a foreign main proceeding under the Singapore Model Law cross-border recognition regime, the requirements for a pre-pack scheme of arrangement under the recent Singapore Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018, and the importance of Environmental, Social and Governance ("ESG") in the restructuring context.
Contents
There has been much discussion concerning the recent district court appellate decision in Purdue Pharma. See In re Purdue Pharma, Case No. 21 cv 7532 (Master Case), 2021 WL 5979108 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2021). We have been tracking developments relating to Purdue Pharma and issues concerning third-party releases: Purdue Pharma: Is Protection of Third Parties by the Automatic Stay an Oxymoron?
On May 7, 2021, we issued a legal alert regarding third-party releases as part of the plan of reorganization in the Perdue Pharma case. [Purdue Pharma: Is Protection of Third Parties by the Automatic Stay an Oxymoron?] The order confirming that plan was appealed and our subsequent legal alert dated December 21, 2021 discussed the decision by Judge Colleen McMahon of the U.S.
On May 7, 2021, we issued a client alert regarding the Perdue Pharma case and the possibility that the bankruptcy case could include a release of individual non-debtor members of the Sackler family. At that time, a plan which contained terms that would effectively extend the automatic stay protections was confirmed by Judge Robert D. Drain, who presided over the bankruptcy case in the Southern District of New York.
An important decision for employers and administrators has been handed down by the High Court in the case of R (Palmer, Forsey) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court [2021] EWHC 3013. The Judgment acts as a stark reminder to employers and company personnel about the criminal liability they can face for failing to notify the Secretary of State of proposed collective redundancies as well as confirming that that an administrator can be prosecuted personally.
Background