In Li Yiqing v Lamtex Holdings Ltd [2021] HKCFI 622, the Companies Court considered whether to put a Bermuda-incorporated company into immediate liquidation in Hong Kong or to adjourn the local winding-up petition to allow restructuring to proceed with the involvement of joint provisional liquidators appointed in Bermuda.
Public policy, “No-Action” and arbitration clauses, and the substitution of petitioners
Background
Bonds that are traded via clearing houses, such as Euroclear and Clearstream, often contain terms providing that there will be a trustee for the issue, who may be appointed by the participants in the relevant clearing system or by the beneficial owners.
Correcting a widespread mistake, Mr Justice Harris in Re China Ocean Industry Group Ltd [2021] HKCFI 247 held that the Court has no jurisdiction to make a validation order after a winding-up petition in respect of the issue of new shares and convertible bonds (“CBs”).
The correct position is that a company subject to a winding-up petition may issue new shares and CBs without a validation order.
Background to the widespread mistake and the present case
La Sala Primera del Tribunal Supremo ha dictado una nueva sentencia, la 46/2021, de 2 de febrero, en la que se confirma lo ya señalado en la Sentencia 4/2021, de 15 de enero de 2021. Dos sentencias miméticas en todo (casi hasta en las partes).
La doctrina ahora asentada por la 46/2021 se resume:
In the landmark case of Re China Huiyuan Juice Group Limited [2020] HKCFI 2940, Mr Justice Harris recalibrated the Hong Kong winding-up jurisdiction and its application to an offshore incorporated, Hong Kong-listed entity.
In particular, the decision explains why the Hong Kong court may be unable to wind up an offshore incorporated, Hong Kong-listed company where all of the company’s operating assets are in the Mainland.
The material facts
In recent years, it has become increasingly common for companies seeking to avoid an immediate winding-up order, particularly listed companies, to pray in aid of alleged efforts to restructure its debts in a bid to obtain adjournments of a winding up petition.
Los jueces de los juzgados mercantiles de Barcelona han publicado un conjunto de directrices básicas para la tramitación de los ‘pre-packs’ concursales españoles, introduciendo la herramienta, opcional, del “administrador silente” (‘silent administrator’). Las directrices se aprobaron en el contexto de un seminario organizado el pasado 20 de enero.
The judges of the Commercial Courts of Barcelona have released a set of basic guidelines for conducting Spanish insolvency pre-packs in that forum, by introducing the feature -of optional use- of the silent administrator. The guidelines were approved in the context of a seminar organized on January 20th.
Often in winding-up petitions, contributories of the company, for one reason or another, may wish to oppose the winding-up petition in their own right, including by filing evidence and making submissions at hearings. One major concern a contributory may have in deciding whether to take this course of action is of course the potential costs consequences, especially in the scenario where the opposition is ultimately unsuccessful and the company is wound up.
Una reciente sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (TS) establece que el socio que ejerce el derecho de separación conserva su condición hasta que se reembolse de manera efectiva su participación. La resolución también señala que, en caso de que la separación se produzca antes de la declaración de concurso de acreedores, el crédito del socio será subordinado sin perjuicio de la eventual contingencia derivada de la posible litigiosidad de su cuantía.