Arbitration and insolvency law in Dubai - is there a link?
Try to imagine a legal system without an effective insolvency law, as in Dubai. How would creditors recover their entitlements? Does it lead to more arbitration activity? Does it explain why the Dubai International Arbitration Centre had over 300 new cases last year and why arbitration is increasingly used?
Insolvency law - is it really necessary?
The Supreme Court handed down its decision yesterday on the combined appeals of Nortel GmbH (In Administration) ("Nortel") and Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (In Administration) ("Lehman Brothers") (together, the "Appellants") against the Pensions Regulator ("tPR").
In the current economic climate, security for payment is key. Although banks have started to lend money again, they remain cautious and those construction firms with weak balance sheets remain at risk of insolvency. This article discusses five pitfalls in the context of some relevant case-law and devices to protect against these.
The Supreme Court yesterday issued its decision in the long-running case concerning financial support directions (“FSDs”) issued by the UK Pensions Regulator to various companies in the Nortel and Lehman groups. The case considered where a company's obligations under an FSD should rank in relation to its other debts if the company was insolvent when the FSD was issued.
Armed with an adjudicator’s decision and a TCC enforcement judgment, can a party issue a statutory demand for payment, even if the other party has a genuine and substantial cross claim against the sum awarded? No, said Judge Stephen Davies in Shaw v MFP. Neither the Construction Act nor the Scheme was intended to displace the position under the Insolvency Rules, which give the court discretion to set aside a statutory demand if the debtor appears to have a counterclaim, set-off or cross demand which equals or exceeds the debt in the statutory demand.
On 18 March 2014, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) issued Circular No. 09/2014/TT-NHNN (Circular 09) to amend and supplement a number of articles in Circular No. 02/2013/TT-NHNN regulating the classification of debt, the establishment and levels of risk reserves, and the use of reserves for dealing with risks during the operation of credit institutions and foreign bank branches.
The Court of Appeal has ruled that the trustees of two occupational defined benefit (DB) schemes can use a particular mechanism, known as a Headway agreement, to maximise the amount of s.75 debt payable by the employers.
In the case of Sarjeant and others v Rigid Group Ltd, both schemes commenced winding up in 2000. No insolvency event had occurred before the winding up in either case. The applicable legislation at the relevant time required the s.75 debt to be calculated on the MFR basis.
On September 27, Law 14/2013, on support to the internationalization of business, was approved (Spanish Official Gazette of September 28). From its entry into force on October 18, the procedure for out-of-court settlement of payments will be implemented, which is a new mechanism of debt renegotiation prior to the declaration of insolvency and an alternative to the so-called “pre-insolvency”, aimed to individual entrepreneurs, freelancers and small and medium-sized businesses that have not yet been declared insolvent whose assets and liabilities meet certain re
Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Arcapita, Bank. B.S.C. v. Bahr. Islamic Bank, No. 15-cv-03828 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2016) [click for opinion]
On 23 June 2017, a reform to the Federal Criminal Code was enacted to classify the criminal offense of “illegal extrajudicial debt collection” established in article 284 Bis.