On July 12, 2022, the Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) passed a judgment in Vidarbha Industries Power Limited v. Axis Bank Limited[1] (“Vidarbha”), which considered the question whether Section 7(5)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”), is mandatory or discretionary in nature.

Strelia a assisté un franchiseur dans le cadre d’une procédure introduite contre une caution personnelle – gérant de société – qui souhaitait échapper à ses obligations de caution en invoquant sa faillite personnelle. Selon la Cour de cassation, un dirigeant d’entreprise ne peut cependant pas automatiquement être qualifié d’entreprise et faire aussi facilement aveu de faillite.

Strelia assisted a franchisor in an action brought against a personal surety – a company director – who attempted to escape his obligations by filing for his personal bankruptcy. However, according to the Court of Cassation, a company director cannot automatically be considered as an enterprise and therefore is not capable of filing for bankruptcy.

Strelia stond een franchisegever bij in een procedure tegen een persoonlijke borgsteller – een bedrijfsleider – die zich aan zijn verplichtingen als borg wilde onttrekken door zichzelf failliet te laten verklaren. Echter, volgens het Hof van Cassatie kan een bedrijfsleider niet automatisch als onderneming gekwalificeerd worden en dus niet zomaar zijn faillissement aanvragen.

Tahkim

Yargılama, devletin sahip olduğu ve mahkemeler aracılığıyla kullandığı bir erktir. Bununla beraber, karşılıklı mutabakat kapsamında kişilerin belirli şartlar sağlandığında uyuşmazlıkların çözümünü devletin yargısı yerine hakem adı verilen özel kişilere bırakması mümkündür.

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016（2016年インド破産倒産法）は、それまで経済的に実現不可能なオンデマンド処理であった倒産処理のワンストップ・ソリューションとして導入されました。Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of Indiaにおいて、インド最高裁判所は、同法の憲法上の正当性を支持しつつ、同法は債権者のための単なる回収法ではなく、むしろ企業債務者の再建のためのものであることを強調してきました[i]。Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. v.

The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP) held its annual International Wealth Structuring Forum in the Cayman Islands on 19 and 20 January 2023 at the Ritz-Carlton, Grand Cayman. The forum was an opportunity for leading trust and wealth management professionals to gather and discuss the latest local and international developments impacting the industry. Hector Robinson KC and James Anson-Holland of Mourant attended the forum and have summarised the top three takeaways from the panel discussions.

The mercurial modern assets

HFW DISPUTES DIGEST 2022 Welcome to our first annual digest, in which we collate our 2022 global HFW LITIGATION and International Arbitration publications in one place. This edition includes updates from the whole Disputes arena across England, AsiaPac, and the Middle East. HFW is one of the world’s largest and most active disputes practices, litigation is in our DNA. We have more than 350 specialist disputes lawyers in offices across the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, and AsiaPac.

In East-West Logistics LLP v Melars Group Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1419 the Court of Appeal once again considered the test for establishing the location of a debtor's centre of main interests (COMI) for the purposes of the Recast Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings 2015/848. The case was a second appeal considering whether to uphold the dismissal of a winding up order on the grounds that the debtor's COMI was not in the United Kingdom.

These are unprecedented times for businesses trying to manage the challenging impact of inflation, labour shortages, supply interruptions, elections, fires, floods, wars and a pandemic. It is more important than ever to manage working capital, mitigate risk and monetise assets.