ISSUE FOUR 2017 FUNDING IN FOCUS Are Asian arbitral centres going to surpass the old continent? PwC Damages: an expert’s view Who wins, where and why? Stockholm, Sweden, Scandinavia Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 60 seconds Q&A with Erin Miller Rankin Brick Court Chambers Competition damages litigation in London pre- and post- Brexit Wilberforce Chambers Getting at trust assets and piercing the corporate veil Disputes funding for corporates CONTENTS Are Asian arbitral centres going to surpass the old continent?

Banking & Finance
Aktuelle Informationen des
Fachbereichs Banking & Finance
News from the Banking & Finance practice
Juli / July 2014
Kennen Sie
schon unseren Blog?
www.cmshs-bloggt.de

The impact of insolvency proceedings on arbitral proceedings is becoming an increasingly important consideration for parties. Two scenarios can be generally envisioned: (i) a company files for insolvency while it is engaged in arbitral proceedings; or (ii) arbitral proceedings are initiated after insolvency proceedings have commenced. In both scenarios, the parties need to assess how the insolvency proceeding affects the arbitral proceedings. This article assesses the impact of insolvency proceedings initiated in Germany on foreign arbitral proceedings.

The global economy is growing at about 3% a year. This is roughly equal to the average growth rate for the last 50 years. However, growth predictions are ticking slightly downwards, mainly due to concerns around trade. And there are still high levels of government and corporate debt arising from the financial crisis and subsequent period of low interest rates. Nowhere is this better illustrated than China, which is forecast to overtake the US as the world's largest economy as early as this year, on some measures.

In Re Southwest Pacific Bauxite (HK) Ltd [2018] 2 HKLRD 449, the Honourable Mr Justice Harris held that a petition to wind up a company on the ground of insolvency should “generally be dismissed” where:

Most commodities contracts are cross border, often with one or more parties located in a country where gaining access or cooperation to enforce an arbitration award or court judgment can be challenging.

If your counterparty is in a ‘difficult’ country, is there any point in incurring the time and cost of pursuing a claim in arbitration or litigation against them at all? Alternatively, do you already have awards or judgments against parties that you have not found a way to enforce? Are they worth any more than the paper they are written on?

Billed as INSOL’s “most popular session”, the plenary session Hot Topics – Avoid Being Burnt! provided a brief overview of developments in the insolvency landscape. The session panel was chaired by Jay A. Carfagnini (Goodmans LLP) with panelists the Honourable Justice Paul Heath of the High Court of New Zealand, Gabriel Moss QC, Gaurav Malhorta (Ernst & Young), and Jason Karas (Lipman Karas).

The panel discussed the following points:

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has recently rendered a decision in a dispute between the Portuguese investor Dan Cake and Hungary. The dispute was based on a bilateral investment agreement between Portugal and Hungary concluded in 1992. In its decision, the Tribunal declared Hungary liable for the breach of the investment agreement. The Tribunal will decide on the amount of damages at a later date.

Dan Cake versus Hungary

Consider this situation: a dispute has arisen between two parties in relation to an agreement which is subject to an arbitration clause. Separately, a winding up application has been made against one of the parties to the arbitration in the jurisdiction in which it is incorporated. An arbitral award is obtained against the potentially insolvent company. That company has assets in Hong Kong, against which the creditor is now seeking to enforce their rights.

Recent Developments