Summary
Introduction
In a move to accord relief to Licensors with outstanding license fee payments, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) vide order dated 7th July 2022 (“Order”) held that a debt arising from unpaid license fees is qualified as an ‘operational debt’ under Section 5(21) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”).
Directors resign for many reasons. For example, there may be disagreements among stakeholders about the future course of the company, they may be concerned about the risks associated with financial difficulty/insolvency, or they may just wish to retire.
In Brooks, in the matter of Tease Hair & Spa Pty Ltd (in liquidation), the Federal Court made orders in favour of the Liquidator, pursuant to section 90-15 of Schedule 2 to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations)) and section 47 of the Trustee Act 1989 (Tas) allowing the Liquidator to realise trust property for the benefit of creditors.
Background
With the lifting of the restrictions on the presentation of winding up petitions, and the likely cash flow pressures caused by price inflation, it is widely anticipated that we will see an increase in the number of companies subject to winding up proceedings. For any business dealing with a company in financial distress, a recent decision of the High Court of England and Wales serves as an important reminder that transactions which take place before the company has been wound up can be vulnerable to challenge.
INTRODUCTION:
I. Introduction
Proceedings against personal guarantors find their origin in Section 128 of the Contract Act, 1872 which deals with the co-extensive liability of a surety. It has long been considered that a surety’s liability to pay the debt is not removed by reason of the creditor’s omission to sue the principal debtor. Such a creditor is not bound to exhaust his remedy against the principal debtor before suing the surety, and a suit may be maintained against the surety even though the principal debtor has not been sued.
Hong Kong’s insolvency regime is based mainly on that of the United Kingdom. The legislation concerning corporate insolvency is contained largely in the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap 32) (“CWUMPO”) and the Companies (Winding-up) Rules. The corporate insolvency and winding up provisions in the legislation are broadly based on the Companies Act 1929 and the Companies Act 1948 of the UK. The last major amendment of those provisions was made in 2016.
A guide to restructuring and insolvency issues and procedures in Hong Kong
Contents
Do landlords do get a good deal in CVAs? It would seem they do (if you don't read the small print…)
A few weeks ago we blogged that we were expecting RSM's research report, which was commissioned by the Insolvency Service, into the impact of CVAs on the landlords. The specific question in the research paper was: "are landlords equitably treated, compared to other creditors in large business CVAs?".
中国半導体大手の紫光集団は破産の発表後、新たな株主を取り込んでいるが、鴻海集団傘下の富士康工業互聯網（FII）も新株主として名を連ねており、今後総額約98億元（約435億台湾ドル）の出資を行う予定である。これにより鴻海集団の半導体事業ポートフォリオは大きな飛躍を遂げると見られる。
中国メディアの報道によると、紫光集団は7月11日に会社株式及び新任取締役、監査役、CEOに関する工商変更登記手続きを完了させている。これまで株主だった清華控股及び北京健坤投資集団は完全に撤退し、智路資本及び建広資産管理により立ち上げられた北京智広芯控股が紫光集団全ての株式を継承した。
業界の分析によれば、紫光集団の事業領域はメモリやIC設計に及び、同集団は中国最大のメモリチップメーカー・長江存儲や、独立系の携帯端末用チップメーカー・紫光展鋭の株主でもある。鴻海集団の紫光集団への出資は、鴻海集団のメモリ及び通信用チップ事業への参入、さらにはファウンドリ／製造、IC設計、OSATがワンストップサービスで行われることを意味する。メモリや通信用チップはいずれも現在鴻海集団で不足している半導体資源であるため、メモリーや通信に関する事業ポートフォリオを拡大できれば、今後半導体や電気自動車事業において大きなアドバンテージとなる。