In this thoroughly new and groundbreaking case it was held that where a creditor has already filed a winding up petition in respect of a company: (1) not only may the directors of the company parry by themselves applying for the appointment of JPLs; but (2) they may do so even without a shareholder resolution or express provision to do so in the company’s articles of association.

The Court of Appeal (CICA) has provided further clarification and guidance to Cayman Islands insolvency professionals on issues ranging from voidable transactions, the scope of liquidators’ powers and legal professional privilege, following the publication this month of a number of decisions that had come before the Court during the November 2016 Court sitting. Set out below is a summary of the Court’s findings in 3 of the CICA decisions which may be relevant to your day to day practice.

Voidable Transactions

Voluntary liquidation or Strike-off? - Alternatives to voluntarily achieving the conclusion of operations and dissolution of Cayman companies

The Court interpreted the terms of a Termination Agreement and found that the Applicant, Europa, was entitled to €1.3 million from the Defendant, AII, in relation to funds invested on Europa's behalf, which had been paid out and held by AII. As a matter of construction, it could not have been intended that AII should be left with sums owing to an investor following a Termination Agreement.

Why segregated portfolio companies are thriving in Cayman? Loeb Smith’s corporate Partner Gary Smith talks to HFM Week about SPCs.

HFMWeek (HFM):How versatile are SPCs? What makes them this way?

The Exempted Limited Partnership (Amendment) Law, 2009, which was enacted in March 2009 and is expected to come into effect before the end of April 2009, has made significant changes to the regime for the winding up and dissolution of exempted limited partnerships (“Partnerships”). The opportunity has also been taken to clarify certain other provisions of the Exempted Limited Partnership Law (2007 Revision) (“ELP Law”).  

Winding Up and Dissolution  

In recent years, with the large increase in the number of enterprise bankruptcy cases, the instances of the legal representative or directors, supervisors and/or senior executives of a bankrupt enterprise (collectively, “senior officers”) being sued by the administrator or creditors have become common. In light of such laws as the Company Law, the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, etc., and typical cases in judicial practice, such senior officers chiefly face the following risks:

优先清算权条款是境外风险投资项目的常见条款，随后逐渐在国内私募股权投资文件中采用。很多投资人关心，这一舶来品能否获得中国司法机关的认可，我们简要分析如下：

一、什么是优先清算权

优先清算权，是指公司清算时，部分股东优先于其他股东获得剩余财产分配的权利；或者，在约定的“视同清算事件”发生时，部分股东优先于其他股东从公司获得收益的权利，“视同清算事件”通常包括公司合并、被并购、出售控股股权、出售主要资产等事件。

在私募股权投资项目中，投资人为保障其自身权益采用优先清算权条款，目的是：在公司经营不善遭遇清算时，投资人可以优先拿回一些补偿；在投资人无法通过公司上市退出，发生公司被并购等“视同清算事件”发生时，其能够优先收回其投资成本和一定程度的投资回报，实现资产变现。该条款可谓投资人的“分钱利器”。

二、如何看待该条款效力

《公司法》第34条明确规定股东可以自由约定“利润分配”的比例。该条规定：“股东按照实缴的出资比例分取红利；公司新增资本时，股东有权优先按照实缴的出资比例认缴出资。但是，全体股东约定不按照出资比例分取红利或者不按照出资比例优先认缴出资的除外。”

2019年12月24日，最高人民法院邀请全国人大法工委、司法部、发改委、人民银行、证监会等单位在京召开了全国法院审理债券纠纷案件座谈会，并讨论了《全国法院审理债券纠纷案件座谈会纪要》（征求意见稿）（以下简称“《纪要》（征求意见稿）”）。会后，市场成员对会上提供的《纪要》（征求意见稿）文本进行了认真学习与热烈讨论。大家普遍认为，该文件正式公布后，将成为司法领域第一份专门针对债券及其纠纷审理机制的文件，不仅为法院审理各类债券纠纷案件奠定坚实基础，更将成为市场成员合法合规开展债券业务、避免或减少法律风险的重要指引。

根据对《纪要》（征求意见稿）的学习，我们希望通过对该文件总体框架及其诸多亮点的简要分析，促进市场成员对债券纠纷解决机制的法律与实务研究工作。在《纪要》正式公布之后，我们将准备一系列文章对相关重要问题进行深入探讨。同时，《纪要》正式公布版本可能对征求意见稿进行修改，需以《纪要》正式公布版本为准。

2019年11月14日，最高院正式发布第九次全国法院民商事审判工作会议的会议纪要——《全国法院民商事审判工作会议纪要》（简称“《九民纪要》”）。

对资产证券化圈的许多机构从业者，《九民纪要》具体有什么样的意义可能不太熟悉。在这里，我们还是借用引言中的一句话来体现它的意义：

“对当前民商事审判工作中的一些疑难法律问题取得了基本一致的看法。”

《九民纪要》的条款中，与金融业务有关的就可以说是包罗万象。但在正式看条款和案例之前，不妨先再来品读一下它的引言部分：

这些统领性原则，结合一些代表性案例，我们认为，会赋予证券化业务更多的司法支持。具体体现在：