The Government of India (GOI) announced a nationwide lock down on account of Covid-19 pandemic with effect from 25 March 2020. This has severely disrupted regular business activities across all sectors of the economy in the country. The quarterly newsletter issued by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) for the quarter October – December 2019, states that as on 31 December 2019, there are approximately 1,961 entities which were undergoing a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code).
Recent weeks have witnessed seismic shifts in the oil and gas industry because of crashing oil prices, demand destruction associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, and crude oil storage reaching record capacity levels. Upstream producers are especially vulnerable to these market pressures and have begun shutting in wells, asserting force majeure, and cutting costs. As counterparties to distressed producers, midstream players face new challenges in navigating contractual relationships and mitigating risk.
The ramifications of COVID-19 are being felt by businesses, and not-for-profits and charities are no exception. Key changes and considerations for not-for-profits and charities are outlined in this article.
Introduction
The COVID-19 crisis has imposed difficult global challenges on the retail industry. Mass closures of brick and mortar store fronts and supply chain disruptions have resulted in an unprecedented halt to business activities. Nevertheless, there are some steps retailers can take to better protect their business interests.
This article is produced by CMS Holborn Asia, a Formal Law Alliance between CMS Singapore and Holborn Law LLC.
The coronavirus pandemic has left companies increasingly concerned about the possibility of winding-up as a result of a failure to pay debts. In a situation where a party’s disputed debt is subject to an arbitration clause, the debtor may wish to seek a stay or dismissal of any winding-up applications commenced against it before the court in favour of arbitration.
Can a company in liquidation adjudicate? Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering Limited & Anor v Astec Projects Limited, or what happens when an irresistible force meets an immoveable object?
“Art is born when the temporary touched the eternal; the shock of beauty is when the irresistible force hits the immoveable post” G K Chesterton
The Singapore Court of Appeal has clarified the standard of review that applies to winding-up applications where the underlying relationship between the debtor and creditor is subject to an arbitration agreement.
Background
Under Section 254(2)(a) of the Singapore Companies Act, a company can be wound-up by the court upon the application of a creditor who has served a statutory demand on the company for a debt of SGD 10,000 or more and the debt continues to remain unpaid for three weeks thereafter.
Jurisdiction to hear a case related to a temporary layoff procedure due to force majeure caused by COVID-19 lies with labor courts not the insolvency judge
Decision by León Commercial Court, April 1, 2020
On 21 April 2020, the Russian Supreme Court issued clarifications addressing various issues related to COVID-19 (“Clarifications”).
Terms of performance of obligations
According to the Clarifications, the period from 30 March to 30 April 2020, which was declared to be non-working by the Decree of the Russian President, does not extend the terms of performance of obligations, including payment terms.
Limitation period
The Singapore Court of Appeal has clarified the standard of review that applies to winding-up applications where the underlying relationship between the debtor and creditor is subject to an arbitration agreement.