The Act is a groundbreaking development in Singapore's corporate rescue laws and includes major changes to the rules governing schemes of arrangement, judicial management, and cross-border insolvency. The Act also incorporates several features of chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, including super-priority rescue financing, cram-down powers, and prepackaged restructuring plans. The legislation may portend Singapore's emergence as a center for international debt restructuring.

On March 10, 2017, Singapore's Parliament approved the Companies (Amendment) Bill 2017 ("Act") to enhance the country's corporate debt restructuring framework. The Act was assented to by President Tony Tan Keng Yam on March 29, 2017, and became effective after it was published in the Singapore Government Gazette on March 30, 2017.

On February 1, 2017, the Supreme Court of Singapore and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware announced that they had formally implemented Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters (the "Guidelines"). The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York adopted the Guidelines on February 17, 2017.

Key Points

• Under rule 98(2)(c) of the Singapore Bankruptcy Rules, the court shall set aside a statutory demand if the creditor holds ‘security for the debt’ claimed in the demand, and the court is satisfied that the value of such security is equivalent to or exceeds the full amount of the debt.

• This case suggests that the creditor making a statutory demand is not obliged to disclose security offered by a third party, but only by the debtor in respect of the debt.

The Facts

Introduction

A statutory demand is an important step in the bankruptcy process, as it allows the creditor to initiate a bankruptcy application against the debtor. It is thus vital that any statutory demand issued must conform to the legislative requirements. In the recent case of Ramesh Mohandas Nagrani v United Overseas Bank Ltd [2015] SGHC 266, the Singapore High Court had to decide whether to set aside a statutory demand based on alleged irregularities in its contents, and touched on what makes a statutory demand invalid.

Manharlal Trikamdas Mody E Anor v Sumikin Bussan International (HK) Limited [2014] SGHC 123

The Singapore High Court in the case of Manharlal Trikamdas Mody E Anor v Sumikin Bussan International (HK) Limited [2014] SGHC 123 decided a number of important issues in the fields of bankruptcy, assignment and ex parte applications.

On 11 May 2015, the Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015 (the “Bill”) was tabled in Parliament for first reading. Essentially, the Bill seeks to amend the Bankruptcy Act to create a more rehabilitative regime for bankrupts, ensure better utilisation of public resources and encourage creditors to exercise financial prudence when extending credit.

On 7 November 2014, OW Bunker A/S (“OW”), a global supplier and trader of marine fuel, filed for bankruptcy in Denmark. Further bankruptcies of OW subsidiaries and affiliates swiftly followed, including the bankruptcy of certain U.S. and Singapore-based OW entities.

Introduction

On 14 July 2015, the Singapore Parliament passed the Bankruptcy Amendment Bill, which seeks to establish certain reforms in Singapore’s bankruptcy regime.

Senior Minister of State for Law Indranee Rajah said in Parliament that the changes address the striking of a balance between the need to hold bankrupts accountable and allowing them to have the opportunity to make a fresh start in their financial affairs after a reasonable period of time.

In this Update, we highlight key aspects of these reforms, which include:

On 14 July 2015, the Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015 (the “Bill”) was passed in Parliament. It is not yet in force. The Bill will amend the Bankruptcy Act to create a more rehabilitative regime for bankrupts and ensure better utilisation of public resources.

When the Bill comes into force, it will effect the following changes to the Bankruptcy Act: