Seah Teong Kang v Seah Yong Chwan [2015] SGCA 48
On 10 September 2015, the Singapore Court of Appeal issued a judgment in Seah Teong Kang v Seah Yong Chwan on section 259 of the Companies Act. Section 259 provides:
“Any disposition of the property of the company, including things in action, and any transfer of shares or alteration in the status of the members of the company made after the commencement of the winding up by the Court shall unless the Court otherwise orders be void.”
Beluga Chartering GmbH (in liquidation) & Ors v Beluga Projects (Singapore) Pte Ltd (in liquidation) & Anor (deugro (Singapore) Pte Ltd, non-party) [2014] SGCA 14
In Larsen Oil and Gas Pte Ltd (in official liquidation in the Cayman Islands and in compulsory liquidation in Singapore) [2011] SGCA 21, the Singapore Court of Appeal endorsed, and elaborated on, the stance taken by the High Court concerning the relationship between arbitration and insolvency
In Larsen Oil and Gas Pte Ltd v Petroprod Ltd (in official liquidation in the Cayman Islands and in compulsory liquidation in Singapore) [2011] SGCA 21, the Singapore Court of Appeal endorsed, and elaborated on, the stance taken by the High Court concerning the relationship between arbitration and insolvency.
SAAG Oilfield Engineering (S) Pte Ltd (formerly known as Derrick Services Singapore Pte Ltd) v Shaik Abu Bakar bin Abdul Sukol & Anor and another appeal [2012] SGCA 7
The Singapore Court of Appeal decision of Chee Yoh Chuang & Anor (as Liquidators of Progen Engineering Pte Ltd (in liquidation)) v Progen Holdings Ltd considered how the lawought to balance the rights of creditorswith the companies directors' desire to keep the company afloat when the company has financial difficulties and when payments were made to creditors.
On 27 May 2016, South Korea's STX Offshore & Shipbuilding Co. ("STX OS"), once the country's fourth-largest shipbuilding firm by revenue, filed for court-supervised rehabilitation, in the Seoul Central District Court.
A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal illustrates that secured creditors should address their priority position relative to all other creditors of their borrower in order to achieve a complete subordination of competing security. Failure to do so in this case resulted in circular priorities that the Court was left to resolve. In light of the Court of Appeal’s decision, secured creditors should ensure they are a party to all subordination agreements with the debtor in order to achieve their expected result.
The Facts and Agreements
In the recent decision of Re WorkGroup Designs Inc.,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal considered the provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (the "BIA") which relate to valuing and determining the claims of secured creditors in proposal proceedings under the BIA.
Background
Norwest Holdings Pte Ltd (in Liquidation) v Newport Mining Ltd [2011] SGCA 42