1 中国を取り巻く環境の変化
一昔前までの中国は、世界の工場として、世界中 の生産性企業がその安価な労働力を求めて進出して いたが、中国の経済成長に伴い労働コストが増加し た結果、中国国内のより安価な地域や東南アジア等 の第三国に生産拠点を移したり、中国国内の事業を 整理・統合したりするなどの動きが出てきている。
近時、中国経済の先行きが不透明であることから、 中国子会社の再編・撤退を考えている企業も少なか らずあるのではないかと思われる。そこで今回から 複数回に分けて「中国子会社の再編・撤退」と題し て、中国子会社の再編・撤退にはどのような方法が あるのか、それぞれの方法の手続はどうすればよい のか、またどのような点に気を付ける必要があるの か等についてご紹介することとしたい。
2 選択肢は現状維持か撤退かだけではない
日本本社が中国子会社の業績を判断する場合、中 国子会社の事業全体をひとくくりにして見ることが 多いのではないかと思われる。すなわち中国子会社 が最終的に赤字であり改善の見込みがなければ撤退、 黒字であるもしくは赤字幅が少なく改善の見込みが あるということであれば現状維持という判断になる 傾向にあると思われる。
새로 제정된 기업구조조정 촉진법(이하 “기촉법”)이 2023. 12. 26. 공포·시행되었습니다. 이에 따라 기촉법에 의한 워크아웃을 통하여 부실징후기업에 대한 신속하고 효율적인 경영정상화를 추진할 수 있게 되었습니다. 이번에 제정된 기촉법에는 2023. 10. 일몰된 제6기 기촉법의 내용이 거의 그대로 유지되면서, 워크아웃기업에 신규로 자금을 지원하는 제3자에게도 우선변제권을 부여하고, 구조조정 담당자의 면책요건을 확대하는 내용이 추가되었습니다.
I. 제정 배경
기촉법은 2001년 한시법으로 제정된 이후 2023년 10월 실효된 제6기 기촉법에 이르기까지 6차에 걸친 제·개정을 거쳐 유지되어 오면서, 워크아웃의 근거법으로서 부실징후기업의 신속하고 효율적인 경영정상화에 활용되었습니다.
2024: main new legislation needing to be considered by companies in Spain 2024 Viewpoint Spain 2 2024: main new legislation needing to be considered by companies in Spain December 2023 Professionals in the various practice areas at Garrigues take a look, from all angles of business law, at the main new legislation that companies will face in the coming year. 2024 promises to be an intense year in terms of statutory and case law.
In November 2023, the Office of National Statistics recorded a total of 2,466 registered company insolvencies in England and Wales, revealing a significant uptick in both creditors’ voluntary liquidations (CVLs) and compulsory liquidations compared to the previous year.
This increase in business insolvencies can be attributed to several external factors such as rising inflation, soaring energy prices and customer spending reductions.
一、问题的提出
企业破产程序中的债权清偿顺位，除按照《企业破产法》第113条规定的一般清偿顺位进行分配外，对于现行特别部门法对应的特殊行业企业破产程序中存在的特殊债权类型，有例外的债权清偿顺位适用空间。涉船企业破产即是其中的一种特殊类型企业破产，本文所称的涉船企业破产为广义概念，包括不限于传统航运公司、单船公司、船舶海工企业、船舶建造与维保企业等等，对应的多是涉及船舶相关的争议解决根据民事案由规定应由海事法院专属管辖类型的适格主体，以上企业在本文统称为涉船企业。之所以涉船企业破产作为企业破产的特殊类型之一，盖其原因是由于涉船企业在实体上还受制于《海商法》等的约束、在程序上还受制于《海事诉讼特别程序法》等的约束。
涉船企业破产在债权类型和债权清偿顺位上，区别于一般企业破产的最大不同在于，除根据企业破产法规定的常见债权类型和顺位清偿外，《海商法》第21条和第22条规定的船舶优先权这一特殊权利类型在涉船企业破产中如何定性、如何定位、如何实现、如何规制的问题，至今仍然是一个争议不绝的问题，尚待明确、统一司法适用标准。
In our prior alert over the summer, we highlighted the Delaware Supreme Court’s decision in Stream TV Networks, Inc. v. SeeCubic, Inc., 279 A.3d 323, 329 (Del.
A Case Analysis of Doctors of Optimization Pty Ltd v MPA Engineering Pty Ltd (Subsidiary of Aquatec Maxon Group Ltd) [2023] QCA 219
Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands all have legislation that enables a company to present a scheme of arrangement to restructure its debts.
One of the defining features of a scheme of arrangement carried out under the relevant legislation in each jurisdiction is the ability to cram down dissenting creditors or members (or classes of them, as the case may be) if the requisite statutory majorities are satisfied and Court sanction of the proposed scheme is obtained.
In the realm of corporate governance, addressing misconduct within a company becomes particularly critical when an insolvency practitioner is appointed. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) sheds light on the intricacies of this scenario, outlining key points for stakeholders to be aware of and steps to take.
The Supreme Court’s judgment in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and ors[1] (“Sequana”) is a key decision on the law surrounding directors’ duties.
The High Court was required to consider the Supreme Court’s Sequana judgment in Hunt v Singh (below).
What did we learn from Sequana?