The Hon’ble Delhi High Court vide its order dated May 13, 2022, in Millennium Education Foundation Vs Educomp Infrastructure And School Management Limited, has held that the mere pendency of an insolvency petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is not a bar for appointment of Arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Good afternoon.

Following are this week’s summaries of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of August 22, 2022.

In Mundo Media Ltd. (Re), the Court refused leave to appeal in a bankruptcy case where a debtor of the bankrupt sought to stay the bankruptcy proceeding in favour of international arbitration. The single proceeding model permits a bankruptcy court to override arbitration agreements.

Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. Supreme Court: NCLT has discretion to not admit Financial Creditor’s CIRP Application even if Corporate Debtor is in default. The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has in its judgment dated July 12, 2022 in the matter of Vidarbha Industries Power Limited v. Axis Bank Limited [Civil Appeal No.

BITE SIZE KNOW HOW FROM THE ENGLISH COURTS

Maritime

Background of the Act

“the specter of sanctions and contempt spawns ancillary litigation that often eclipses the issues at the heart of the underlying dispute.”

—From In re A.T. Reynolds & Sons, Inc., 452 B.R. 374, 376 (S.D.N.Y. 2011), reversing a Bankruptcy Court order of contempt and sanctions for lack of “good faith” in a mandated mediation.

Mediation-in-bankruptcy has been an effective tool for resolving mass tort cases.

That effectiveness has been for the benefit of all parties involved, such as:

Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. Supreme Court: NCLT/NCLAT should not sit in appeal over commercial wisdom of the CoC to allow withdrawal of CIRP. The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has in its judgment dated June 3, 2022, in the matter of Vallal RCK v. M/s. Siva Industries and Holdings Limited and Others [Civil Appeal Nos.

Contents

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。