Distressed transactions increasingly mark the Swiss M&A landscape. An important piece in the Swiss restructuring toolbox is the sale of parts or all of the business under court supervision during a composition moratorium. It has been used successfully in an increasing number of cases recently. Typically, the relevant part of the business is pre-packed – structured and prepared for sale – before being sold with court approval. As we anticipate more distressed M&A transactions in 2025, it is worthwhile exploring the intricacies and implications of the Swiss pre-pack.

This article explains why the purchase of a shell company should be avoided today and even more so in the future under the new law, and that the formation of a new company is preferable when setting up a business (start-up).

At the end of this article, the possible effects of the revision of the law on legitimate transactions with company shares will also be discussed.

Seeking sound legal advice is therefore worthwhile both when founding a new company and when taking over an operating company.

Recently, in State Bank of India v. India Power Corporation Ltd., Civil Appeal 10424 of 2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court adjudicated upon the issue of certified copy of Order that is filed along with the appeal. 

The Hon’ble Supreme Court analysed several provisions of NCLT Rules and NCLAT Rules and held as follows:

i) Both the certified copy submitted free of cost as well as the certified copy which is made available on payment of cost are treated as “certified copies” for the purpose of Rule 50 of NCLT Rules.

A distressed merger and acquisition (“M&A”) is essentially a sub-category of a conventional M&A, which involves sales of shares or assets of companies that are in financial turmoil and these companies are being placed under administration, receivership and/or liquidation. Due to the unprecedented Covid-19 pandemic, distressed M&A transactions have become more common in recent years with companies in financial and operational distress looking to dispose of their assets to better manage high illiquidity as well as reducing over-indebtedness risk.

We examine the findings of the High Court’s decisions and discuss the lessons which directors of distressed businesses should take from them

The collapse of BHS in April 2016 remains one of the most extraordinary corporate failures in recent memory. Eight years on from the commencement of insolvency proceedings, and following a lengthy trial, the High Court has issued an expansive judgment on claims brought by the joint liquidators of four companies in the group against two former directors.

Factual background

Construction insolvency is not a new problem. With the continued presence of fixed price contracts, in an industry which has always been troubled with cash flow problems and low profit margins, coupled with persistent cost inflation and labour and materials issues affecting the supply chain, it is no surprise that we continue to see insolvencies. The question is, what can you do to protect yourself from insolvency?

Executive Summary

Pierre Dzakpasu, Anne Jesudason and Florence W Y Li, Mayer Brown

This is an extract from the 2025 edition of GRR's The Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

MONTHLY NEWSLETTER SERIES AUGUST, 2024 | VOL. XV VAISH ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES LEGALAXY WWW.VAISHLAW.COM LEGAL MAXIM Volenti Non Fit Injuria: “No wrong is done to one who consents.” MONTHLY NEWSLETTER SERIES AUGUST, 2024 | VOL.

It is essential that any UK individual or entity doing business, managing funds/other economic resources, or providing financing or professional services, keeps abreast of the current UK Russian sanctions regime, which is chiefly set out in the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (the "Regulations"). The question of how the Regulations might apply to those with fiduciary duties – either as trustees or as directors – has been considered in two recent High Court cases.