简介
最近在Re Ashit Sud (Debtor)[2022] 2 HKLRD 898一案中，法院说明了债权人在甚么情况下拒绝债务人的和解建议会被视为不合理。案件审结时，法院对涉案公司（「该公司」）发出清盘令，以及对提供担保的公司董事Ashit Sud先生（「该董事」）发出破产令。
背景
Today’s insolvency statistics contained few surprises, creditors’ voluntary liquidations (CVLs) have continued to outnumber other types of company insolvencies by some margin and have distorted the overall picture, which is that (putting aside CVLs where directors/shareholders elect to pull the plug themselves on a company’s survival) figures for other types of company insolvencies remain below pre-pandemic figures.
For those who missed it the Insolvency Service published an excellent research report at the end of June which focuses on the treatment of landlords in company voluntary arrangements (CVAs). This was against the backdrop of a large number of "landlord" CVAs in recent years – particularly in the retail and casual dining sectors – where landlords have often complained that they have been unfairly treated compared to other compromised creditors. The report concludes that landlords are, broadly speaking, equitably treated compared to other classes of unsecured creditors.
The Insolvency Service has published a consultation on the implementation of two UNCITRAL "model laws" relating to insolvency: the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments (MLIJ), and the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency (MLEG). The UK has already enacted legislation based on the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, in the form of the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 (CBIR).
The Debt Respite Scheme (Breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020, commonly referred to as the "Breathing Space Regulations", came into force on 4 May 2021. The Regulations provide eligible individuals with problem debt a period of protection from their creditors known as a "breathing space moratorium".
What effect will government proposals have on insurers, policyholders and other stakeholders?
Introduction
简介
最近在Re Hong Kong Bai Yuan International Business Co., Ltd [2022] HKCFI 960一案中，原讼法庭（「法院」）命令被告人（「该公司」）向呈请人（「呈请人」）偿还一项受仲裁协议涵盖的债务，否则将被颁令清盘。法院澄清，虽然法院在行使酌情权时会给予仲裁协议相当大的比重，但不一定将事情转交仲裁处理。
背景
呈请人于2021年6月10日提出呈请（「该呈请」），要求法院对该公司发出清盘令，理由是该公司未能遵守关于一项955,000欧元债务（「该债务」）的法定要求偿债书，因此根据香港法例第32章《公司（清盘及杂项条文）条例》（「该条例」）第178条被视为无力偿债。
The Insolvency Service has published an interim report which evaluates three permanent changes to the insolvency regime as introduced by The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA): restructuring plans; the standalone moratorium and the restriction on contractual termination rights (so-called ipso facto clauses). The takeaway messages are as follows:
簡介
最近在Re Hong Kong Bai Yuan International Business Co., Ltd [2022] HKCFI 960一案中，原訟法庭（「法院」）命令被告人（「該公司」）向呈請人（「呈請人」）償還一項受仲裁協議涵蓋的債務，否則將被頒令清盤。法院澄清，雖然法院在行使酌情權時會給予仲裁協議相當大的比重，但不一定將事情轉交仲裁處理。
背景
呈請人於2021年6月10日提出呈請（「該呈請」），要求法院對該公司發出清盤令，理由是該公司未能遵守關於一項955,000歐元債務（「該債務」）的法定要求償債書，因此根據香港法例第32章《公司（清盤及雜項條文）條例》（「該條例」）第178條被視為無力償債。