Chris Corbin and Jeremy King, part owners of the company that owns the famous Wolseley restaurant had their company pushed into administration by its co-owner and major lender, having been in default since 2020, and now owes £38m. Administration might not have come as a surprise to anyone in that case.
However, directors and shareholders will not usually get anything like as much notice of a lender’s intention to appoint administrators and will frequently get none at all, as Insolvency and Asset Recovery Partner Tim Symes explains here.
Introduction
Earlier this month, the English Insolvency and Companies Court (the “ICC”) made a limited civil restraint order against a shareholder who had repeatedly sought, unmeritoriously, to challenge the 2017 restructuring of Paragon Offshore plc (in liquidation) (“Paragon”) (Hammersley v Soden & Ors [2022] EWHC 223 (Ch)).
This week’s TGIF considers the recent High Court decision in Walton v ACN 004 410 833 Limited (formerly Arrium Limited) (in liquidation) [2022] HCA 3, which provides guidance on the range of potential purposes for which an examination of company officers may be legitimately pursued by ‘eligible applicants’.
Key Takeaways
ANNUAL CASE REVIEW 2021 serlecourt RAISING THE BAR IN CHANCERY & COMMERCIAL “Stacked with highly experienced silks and juniors, Serle Court has long been one of the leading sets when it comes to civil fraud disputes” Legal 500 serlecourt 02 Welcome to Serle Court’s Annual Review of 2021. In the second year of the pandemic, barristers at Serle Court have continued to appear, often remotely, in courts at all levels around the world, in cases across our wide field of commercial chancery law.
This article forms part of our litigation funding series and discusses a key decision that has the potential to significantly support the due diligence efforts of litigation funders in external administration contexts.
Following the 54% increase in the energy price cap announced by Ofgem on 3 February, and with many predicting that a second substantial increase may be required this October to keep pace with wholesale prices, what is next for beleaguered small energy suppliers?
In Walton v ACN 004 410 833 Limited (formerly Arrium Limited) (in liquidation) [2022] HCA 3, the High Court extended the purpose for which, and incidentally parties by whom, public examinations may be used.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) (the “Court”) in Re Harte Gold Corp.,[1]issued its first published decision on the use of reverse vesting orders (“RVOs”) finding that the
After a lawsuit filed by liquidators of a company that collapsed against the company’s former officers, directors, and independent auditors was dismissed in limine, a new Israeli Supreme Court ruling overturned that decision and allowed the liquidators to move forward with the lawsuit, alleging that lack of oversight was what led to the company’s collapse.
１．はじめに
2021年12月15日、インドネシアの憲法裁判所は、破産および債務の支払義務の停止に関する2004年法律第37号（「倒産法」）235条1項及び293条1項において定められた、支払停止手続に対する法的救済がないことについての司法審査に関する決定（No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021（「本件決定」）を致しました。本ニュースレターでは本件決定の内容についてご説明致します。
２．背景
インドネシアでは、破産手続とは別に、日本でいう民事再生手続に相当する支払停止手続（Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang）（「PKPU」）が規定されております。PKPUにおいては、債務者が、返済額の減額や返済スケジュールなどを盛り込んだ再生計画を提出し、裁判所が各債権者の同意を得て再生計画の認可・不認可を決定するとされております。同決定は全債権者を拘束するところ、下記のように、倒産法235条1項及び293条は、当該決定については法的救済が無い旨を規定しております。