The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”), was enacted to inter alia provide a consolidated framework to resolve insolvency in a time-bound manner and to maximise the value of assets. This objective is further aided by a moratorium under Section 14 that halts legal proceedings against the corporate debtor, and the immunity provision under Section 32A, which offers a fresh slate to resolution applicants upon plan approval.

Court held that an insolvent company was required to provide adequate security when enforcing an adjudication decision.

Background

Introduction                                                                         

The structured finance market in the APAC region continues to grow in recent years, particular in the number of new issuances and the use of different financial products in complex structuring. Cayman special purpose vehicles (SPVs) are one of the most utilised offshore vehicles in the Asian structured finance industry, which is well supported by established legal and regulatory regimes.

The Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”) recently handed down judgment in Prinsloo v Majiedt N.O. and Another, addressing the protection of benefits of long-term life insurance policies under section 63 of the Long-term Insurance Act, 1998 (“LTIA”). The case specifically considered these protections in the context of marriage in community of property and the subsequent sequestration of the joint estate.

Introduction

An amalgamation or reconstruction of companies under sections 366 and 370 of the Companies Act 2016 ("CA 2016") is a common tool for corporate restructuring in Malaysia. It enables the seamless transfer of assets and liabilities from the transferor to the transferee, typically within group structures where both companies share a common ultimate holding company.

In a significant decision with far-reaching consequences for the financial and insolvency ecosystem, the Kerala High Court (“High Court”) in J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala adjudicated upon the levy of stamp duty on assignment agreements executed under Section 5 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act”).

This article combines the theoretical analysis and practical experience of the bankruptcy reorganization case of five companies, including Harbin Gongda High-tech Industrial Development Co., Ltd..undertaken by Lawyer Nafisa Nihmat's team in 2023, one of the “national bankruptcy classic cases” in 2023, and approximately 50 delisted companies in recent years. It discusses the unique reorganization value, reorganization paths, and common controversial and difficult issues in the practice of delisted companies under Chinese law.

I. Introduction

The Supreme Court of India’s (“Supreme Court”) decision in the case of Kalyani Transco vs M/s Bhushan Steel and Power Limited1 and connected appeals raises some serious legal issues. We understand from the public domain that parties are considering filing review and curative petitions. Without expressing any views on the judgement, set out below is a summary of the key findings and directions of the Supreme Court.

 Upcoming Lexology Index research – June to August 2025