Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Mediation-In-Bankruptcy: An Effective, But Difficult, Tool For Resolving Mass Tort Disputes
    2022-07-19

    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:

    Filed under:
    USA, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Koley Jessen PC, Mediation, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Donald L. Swanson
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Koley Jessen PC
    Between the lines- July, 2022
    2022-07-19

    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.

    Filed under:
    India, Arbitration & ADR, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, White Collar Crime, Vaish Associates Advocates, Coronavirus, Anti-money laundering, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (India), National Company Law Tribunal
    Location:
    India
    Firm:
    Vaish Associates Advocates
    Enforcement of Judgments and Arbitral Awards in England and Wales
    2022-07-07

    Contents

    Filed under:
    Switzerland, United Kingdom, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fortior Law, Insolvency, Receivership, House of Lords, London Court of International Arbitration
    Authors:
    Vitaliy Kozachenko , Yelyzaveta Holovan
    Location:
    Switzerland, United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Fortior Law
    在Lasmos案之後,涵蓋清盤呈請所涉債務的仲裁協議的法律效力為何?
    2022-06-30

    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。

    Filed under:
    Hong Kong, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, ONC Lawyers, Court of First Instance (Hong Kong)
    Authors:
    Ludwig Ng , Ivy Wang
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Firm:
    ONC Lawyers
    Post Lasmos - What is the legal effect of an arbitration agreement governing an underlying debt on a winding-up petition?
    2022-06-30

    Introduction

    Filed under:
    Hong Kong, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, ONC Lawyers, Court of First Instance (Hong Kong)
    Authors:
    Ludwig Ng , Ivy Wang
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Firm:
    ONC Lawyers
    在Lasmos案之后,涵盖清盘呈请所涉债务的仲裁协议的法律效力为何?
    2022-06-30

    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。

    Filed under:
    Hong Kong, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, ONC Lawyers, Court of First Instance (Hong Kong)
    Authors:
    Ludwig Ng , Ivy Wang
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Firm:
    ONC Lawyers
    Arbitration versus the “Single Proceeding Model” in Insolvency Proceedings - Which prevails?
    2022-06-09

    Overview and Why This Case Matters

    Filed under:
    Canada, British Columbia, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, UNCITRAL, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act 1985 (Canada), Ontario Superior Court of Justice
    Authors:
    Andrew Kalamut
    Location:
    Canada
    Firm:
    McCarthy Tétrault LLP
    Singapore reaffirms the applicability of legal finance in corporate insolvencies
    2022-06-08

    In a recent judgment1, the Singapore High Court allowed the liquidator of insolvent Castlewood Group to enter into a litigation funding arrang

    Filed under:
    Singapore, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Burford Capital, Singapore High Court
    Authors:
    Quentin Pak
    Location:
    Singapore
    Firm:
    Burford Capital
    Arbitration Clauses as Separate Executory Contracts
    2022-06-06

    The Bankruptcy Protector

    This term, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan has authored a pair of opinions related to arbitration. The first of these decisions, Badgerow v. Walters, 20-1143, 142 S. Ct. 1310 (2022) came down on March 31, 2022, where Justice Kagan, writing for the 8/1 majority, held that a court must have an independent basis of federal jurisdiction to undertake a petition to confirm or vacate an arbitration award.

    Filed under:
    USA, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Federal Arbitration Act 1926 (USA), Supreme Court of the United States
    Authors:
    Woods Drinkwater
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
    与PPP项目合同主体问题相关的风险及其防范——以某案例为切入点
    2022-06-01

    本文拟以某案例为切入点,揭示及探讨政府和社会资本合作(Public-Private Partnership,下称PPP)项目中社会资本方因项目合同主体问题而面临的潜在风险及可能的风险防范措施。

    1. 案例情况简述

    项目投资人A公司(外国公司)与B政府签订某项目投资框架协议,约定由A公司设立项目公司C以负责建设、运营某污水处理厂特许经营项目,并在对项目建设时间、技术要求、费用确认机制等关键条件做出约定的同时,明确“详细条款在正式合同中约定”。

    随后,B政府作为甲方与A公司作为乙方签订PPP项目合同,约定项目按照合同要求建设并投入运营后,由B政府承担向乙方支付污水处理费的义务(最终用户向B政府付费),并且“当项目公司成立后,乙方在本协议项下的所有权利和义务自动转让给项目公司”。

    根据前述协议,A公司设立由其100%控股的项目公司C,由C公司承继PPP项目合同中与建设、运营项目相关的所有权利义务。C公司主要通过向当地银行贷款的方式进行项目融资,以完成项目建设并将污水处理厂投入运营。

    Filed under:
    China, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Projects & Procurement, King & Wood Mallesons, Bankruptcy
    Authors:
    Zhang Shouzhi
    Location:
    China
    Firm:
    King & Wood Mallesons

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 12
    • Page 13
    • Page 14
    • Page 15
    • Current page 16
    • Page 17
    • Page 18
    • Page 19
    • Page 20
    • …
    • Next page ››
    • Last page Last »
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days