Welcome to the latest edition of the Financial Regulation Weekly Bulletin.
If you would like to discuss in more detail, please contact your relationship partner or email one of our Financial Regulation team.
Developments this week are in relation to:
|
INTRODUCTION:
In Re King & Wood Mallesons and other matters [2025] SGHC 67, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore (High Court) granted recognition and reliefs under the UNCITRAL Model Law on CrossBorder Insolvency (Model Law) in respect of a consolidated reorganisation of three Chinese companies in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This decision provides guidance to insolvency office-holders appointed under PRC law on the procedural requirements to seek recognition under the Model Law in Singapore.
Switzerland is known for its efficient legal system and pro-enforcement stance. However, if you are a foreign insolvency practitioner handling bankruptcy proceedings with ongoing litigation in Switzerland, you may face some procedural hurdles.
This article outlines the effects of a foreign bankruptcy decree in Switzerland and explores the available options to initiate or continue litigation.
WHAT HAPPENS?
Foreign insolvency practitioners are barred from litigating without prior recognition
Upcoming Lexology Index research – June to August 2025
Report Title | Research begins | Submission deadline (referees and work highlights) | Research ends | Survey link | Research contact |
What you need to know
Given the increased intertwining of national economies, cross-border insolvency presents salient legal and financial difficulty. Upon the existence of an insolvent debtor in more than one country, the necessity to deal with assets and/or creditors creates very complicated jurisdictional problems and other legal issues. Most of the time, a company will operate in several jurisdictions and hence face very complicated transnational insolvency scenarios.