Year in Review – Thai Law in 2016

Conducting Business in Ukraine 2016 Conducting Business in Ukraine 2016 Conducting Business in Ukraine 2016 Baker & McKenzie Renaissance Business Center 24 Bulvarno-Kudriavska (Vorovskoho) St.

Fraser Turner Limited v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and others [2019] EWCA Civ 1290

The Court of Appeal has upheld a decision striking out claims against administrators which alleged that they owed a duty to a specific creditor and were guilty of misfeasance.

Fraser Turner Limited (FT) was party to an agreement (“Royalty Agreement”) with London Mining plc (“LM”) and London Mining Company Ltd (“LMCL”) which provided for FT to receive a royalty in respect of iron ore produced at the Marampa mine. LMCL was a wholly owned subsidiary of LM.

Background

The case concerned royalty payments, which a creditor had a contractual right to receive, arising from iron ore produced at a mine in Sierra Leone.

The parent company of the Sierra Leonean mining company went into administration and administrators from PwC were appointed. The creditor's director called the administrators to stress the importance of bringing the royalty payments to the attention of a third party purchaser.

The administrators subsequently sold the mine, but did not make the purchaser aware of the royalty issue.

An insight into the key issues and challenges facing global infrastructure projects, and a look at possible solutions and mitigations.

In brief

The Masri litigation has yet again troubled the English Court on the principle of comity and provided the Court of Appeal with the opportunity to say just how important it is in international debt enforcement.

The background on Masri

Clients active in commodities markets (e.g. large consumers of copper and other metals) may be affected by the collapse of MF Global which was recently placed into Chapter 11 process in the US and into Administration in the UK. MFGlobal was an active clearing agent on numerous metal exchanges including the London Metal Exchange.

In This Issue:

U.S. Supreme Court: Creditors May Immediately Appeal Denials of Automatic-Stay Relief

The sudden fall of the oil market is already wreaking havoc on companies, and recent bankruptcy filings may be just the beginning.

A new chapter has begun in the ongoing saga to clarify the role of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in bankruptcy proceedings involving FERC-jurisdictional contracts. In a March 30 order, the FERC identified how it will exercise its jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act (FPA) concurrently with the Bankruptcy Court with regard to the proposed rejection of FERC-jurisdictional contracts in bankruptcy.[1]