On June 6, 2017, Australian-based mining equipment supplier Emeco Holdings emerged from chapter 15 proceedings in the Southern District of New York following an Australian court’s sanctioning of the company’s scheme of arrangement.

The scheme of arrangement was a component of an innovative, comprehensive restructuring that provided for a three-way merger of three large Australian mining service companies and a restructuring of A$680 million of debt through a debt-for-equity swap, rights offering, and full refinancing.

In December 2013, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held as a matter of first impression in Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. Barnet (In re Barnet), 737 F.3d 238 (2d Cir. 2013), that section 109(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires a debtor “under this title” to have a domicile, a place of business, or property in the U.S., applies in cases under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code.

Litigation funding can form a useful part of the arsenal of an insolvency practitioner when attempting to maximise the return to creditors. Yet funders can be met with suspicion by creditors and courts alike, depending on the country in which you pursue your litigation.

This break out session sought to highlight key issues for funders and borrowers, and regional differences in how litigation funding is perceived and applied.

With the Australian Taxation Office very active in winding up companies for unpaid taxes, it is now commonplace for insolvency professionals to be faced with pending winding up petitions when considering an appointment as voluntary administrator. Obtaining an adjournment of the petition is often the first critical task in an administration.

There has been a lot of excitement generated around the fact that the UAE has finally adopted a Federal bankruptcy law. But this is not strictly accurate. Although the new Federal Bankruptcy Law No. 8 of 2016 (BL) is the first standalone bankruptcy legislation coming into force end of December 2016, the UAE has had a bankruptcy regime since 1993, laid down in the Commercial Transactions Code (CTC). However, it was rarely used.

General context

The statutory regulation of cryptocurrency in Russia is yet to be made compatible with the current dynamics of digital assets.

The difference between debt and equity claims can cause confusion among lenders, creditors, and insolvency professionals alike. In Tudor Sales Ltd. (Re), the British Columbia Supreme Court provided further judicial guidance on this distinction.

In a wide-reaching judgment concerning an appeal by Mighty River International in the administration of Mesa Minerals, the Western Australian Court of Appeal, has recognised that “holding” Deed of Company Arrangement (DOCA) is permissible under Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act.

The key points – Holding DOCAs as a flexible framework

The key points for insolvency and turnaround professionals to take from Mighty River International v Hughes are:

Background and Summary

The English scheme of arrangement (“Scheme”) has found particular utility throughout the European Union (the “EU”) and internationally as a restructuring tool for both foreign and UK companies alike. Providing creditors with access to a court sanctioned compromise procedure (which can be used prior to formal insolvency), the Scheme has combined flexibility with a high degree of commercial and procedural certainty for all involved, including creditors.

Der Bundestag hat Ende Februar 2017 eine Reform des Anfechtungsrechts verabschiedet. Die Reform bringt substantielle Änderungen des Insolvenzanfechtungsrechts, von denen in erster Linie Lieferanten und Dienstleister profitieren dürften, die sich Ansprüchen eines Insolvenzverwalters in der Insolvenz ihres Kunden ausgesetzt sehen. Die neuen Regeln sind am 5. April 2017 in Kraft getreten und gelten für alle Insolvenzverfahren, die ab diesem Datum eröffnet werden.

1. Hintergrund der Anfechtungsreform