Since the bankruptcy of Hanjin Shipping Co. Ltd., so many articles have been written about how it happened, why it happened, and what can be learned from this tragedy. When Hanjin Shipping, once the 7th largest container carrier in the world and the 4th largest container carriers in the transpacific (Asia – US & Canada) trade, filed for bankruptcy, few believed that a “too big to fail” organization like Hanjin would not be given a government bail-out. So, naturally, no one really appreciated the kind of disruption and losses that would subsequently affect the global supply chain.

It has become increasingly common for companies needing to restructure to open restructuring / insolvency proceedings in a jurisdiction outside of where their centre of corporate control is located or assets are concentrated. Forum shopping in a restructuring context is becoming more common place, however it also remains highly controversial. The panelists at the INSOL breakout session, A Hitchhikers Guide of Forum Shopping, considered what makes a good forum for restructuring / insolvency, and whether forum shopping is desirable or undesirable.

The English Court granted recognition of Chapter 11 proceedings in relation to a company that was incorporated in the UK but had its centre of main interests ("COMI") in the United States, confirming that the Directors were foreign representatives for the purpose of the Cross Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 ("the Regulations").

This past weekend, Hanjin vessels commenced unloading operations on the U.S. West Coast for the first time since Hanjin filed its bankruptcy petition with the Seoul Central District Court in Korea. Vessels have also been reportedly unloading in Japanese and Canadian ports. There is an obvious overriding public interest in having the many millions of dollars worth of cargo resume moving to its various destinations.

1. Commencement of Rehabilitation Proceedings by Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd. (“Hanjin Shipping”) On August 31, 2016 Hanjin Shipping filed a rehabilitation petition with the Seoul Central District Court. The Case number is Seoul Central District Court 2016 HoeHap 100211. On August 31, 2016, the Bankruptcy Division of the Seoul Central District Court issued a comprehensive prohibition order, as a provisional measure, to all creditors.

Introduction

Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code, which deals with cross-border insolvency cases, took effect nearly 11 years ago.(1) Congress enacted Chapter 15 in 2005 to replace Bankruptcy Code Section 304, which previously addressed transnational insolvencies.(2) Chapter 15 largely incorporates the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, which was promulgated in May 1997. The Model Law is designed:

Restructuring & Insolvency
Global
Restructuring & Insolvency Newsletter
June 2014
In this issue:
Challenges faced by foreign creditors of Suntech
With an eye on the insolvency and restructuring proceedings of Suntech Power Holdings' principal operating subsidiary in China, Kwun Yee Cheung surveys the difficulties confronting foreign creditors in Chinese bankruptcies and restructurings. > Read more
Using English or US proceedings to restructure Asian businesses

The rapid evolution of a robust secondary market for claims against the three largest failed Icelandic banks provides a powerful example of the prompt adaptation of an existing secondary-market legal framework -- originally developed in the US and Europe -- to a complex and novel bankruptcy regime and trading environment.

Given the current worldwide economic climate, the number of companies facing insolvency that have assets in multiple jurisdictions around the world has increased dramatically. It is not unusual in today’s global economy for a corporation to have commercial offices, production plants and/ or research facilities in many different countries. A company that is faced with the bleak picture of insolvency may be forced to make decisions on whether to seek protection under a number of different statutory structures.

The shipping industry was arguably one of the hardest hit by the downturn that spread around the world late last year. The severe shipping slump, evidenced by a 93.5 per cent fall in the Baltic Dry Index between the summer of 2008 and December 2008, inevitably led to insolvencies of shipping companies across the globe1. This article briefly considers the unique challenges that insolvency practitioners face when balancing insolvency procedures against the application of maritime law.