How to bring a dissolved company back to life through administrative or court restoration.

When a company is dissolved or struck off the Register of Companies it ceases to exist. Property belonging to the dissolved company vests in the Crown to be disposed of. However, that is not always the end of the matter and in certain circumstances it is possible to restore a company to the Register.

Why restore a company?

The concept that a court- or insolvency-appointed director (such as a liquidator or administrator) may “adopt” employment contracts — well known under UK insolvency practice — has no direct equivalent under Hungarian law. Nevertheless, it is important in practice to understand when a managing director becomes the actual addressee of employer obligations.

Hungarian Context

The key actors in Hungarian insolvency and restructuring proceedings are:

在没有股东协议的情况下，英属维尔京群岛（“BVI”）公司的股东权利由公司章程大纲及细则的条款所规定。然而，控股股东可能采取损害少数股东权益的行为。在这种情况下，BVI法院有权处理与少数股东权益和不公平损害相关的问题。受损害的股东最常见的救济措施之一是要求法院以正当正当公平的理由将公司清盘。

本法律简报将概述BVI关于不公平损害的法律制度以及以正当公平的理由进行公司清盘的救济途径。此外，本简报还将探讨该救济措施适用与否的具体情形。

不公平损害

《英属维尔京群岛商业公司法（2020修订版）》（经修订）（“BCA”）为股东提起不公平损害救济诉讼提供了法律依据。如果股东认为公司事务“曾以、正在或可能以压迫性、不公平歧视性或对其股东身份构成不公平损害的方式处理，或公司行为曾有、正在或可能对其股东身份构成压迫性、不公平歧视性或不公平损害，可向法院申请裁决令“。

在评估受害股东所声称的公司事务是否对其造成不公平损害时，BVI法院将采用客观标准。每种情况各有不同，因此，为了确定是否存在不公平损害，BVI法院会综合考虑以下因素：

Following the publication of our recent article on the voluntary liquidation of solvent limited liability companies (LLCs) in the UAE, an important question was raised by one of the readers: what happens if, during liquidation, it is discovered that the company’s assets are insufficient to discharge all of its debts, and what liability may arise for shareholders or directors in such a case?

If a company faces a situation threatening insolvency, the satisfaction of creditors' claims is at risk. In such cases, the company's managers must prioritize the interests of the creditors, and for failure to do so, they are subject to civil and/or criminal liability, which we describe in this article.

Overview

Article 49, Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law stipulates: "If a registered trademark has not been used for three consecutive years without a legitimate reason, any entity or individual may apply to the Trademark Office for the revocation of the registered trademark."

The core purpose of this provision is to clean up "zombie trademarks" and activate trademark resources. However, the definition of "legitimate reason" directly relates to the continuation of trademark rights, and there are many disputes in practice. So, what constitutes a "legitimate reason"?

In Re Bayview Health – Matilda Bay Pharmacy Pty Ltd; ex parte Smith & Jacobs [No 2] [2025] WASC 405, the Court held that a failure to provide the 14 days’ notice of a board meeting, required by a shareholder agreement, to appoint a voluntary administrator, was a procedural irregularity that could be cured.

Key Takeaway

According to the latest statistics from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the construction industry has faced sustained and accelerating financial distress over the past four years. Since FY 2021-2022, the number of insolvency appointments has almost tripled, with nearly 4,900 cases in FY 2024-2025 alone. And, the 744 cases already recorded for FY 2025-2026 indicate the construction industry continues to suffer severe financial distress.

In Otway (liquidator), in the matter of AMD Freight Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2025] FCA 1169 the Federal Court of Australia considered an application for termination of a winding up under the Corporations Act brought by the liquidators of AMD Freight Pty Limited (In Liquidation) (Compan

In a recent decision, In the matter of Toys “R” Us ANZ Limited (subject to deed of company arrangement) [2025] FCA 1135, the Federal Court provided important clarification as to its discretionary power to permit the administrator of a deed of company arrangement to transfer share in the company.