If 2016 ended with more questions than answers as to how Brexit would take shape, 2017 began with at least a little more clarity.
The Supreme Court has held that a principal was entitled to recover payments collected by its agent on its behalf following the agent's insolvency: Bailey and another (Respondents) v Angove's PTY Limited (Appellant) [2016] UKSC 47.
Executive summary
On 11 February 2016 the High Court delivered a unanimous judgment1 which clears the path for liquidators and others to join insurers of defendants to proceedings, enabling the determination at the same trial as to whether an insurer has an obligation to indemnify defendants in respect of any liability that may be found against those defendants.
El pasado 18 de junio entró en vigor la Ley 11/2015 de recuperación y resolución de entidades de crédito y empresas de servicios de inversión (la "Ley 11/2015"), que deroga y refunde la antigua Ley 9/2012, de 14 de noviembre, de reestructuración y resolución de entidades de crédito (la "Ley 9/2012").
According to press reports this week, the insolvency exception to the Jackson reforms will end next April, meaning that CFA success fees and ATE insurance premiums will no longer be recoverable in proceedings brought by liquidators, administrators, trustees in bankruptcy, or companies in liquidation or administration. Recoverability in all other claims was abolished from April 2013 (subject to exceptions for defamati
Willmott Growers Group Inc v Willmott Forests Ltd (Receivers and Managers appointed) (In Liquidation) [2013] HCA 51
Overview
Section 568 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) gives liquidators broad powers to disclaim onerous property.
Until the High Court’s decision, it was unclear whether this power entitled a liquidator of an insolvent landlord to disclaim a lease, such that the solvent tenant no longer has any proprietary interest in the land.
The first case has been decided under Australia’s statutory powers to set aside “creditor defeating dispositions”.
Until the recent decisions of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd v Bryant, in the matter of Gunns Limited (in liq) (receivers and managers appointed) [2021] FCAFC 64 (Badenoch) and Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd v Bryant, in the matter of Gunns
A recent pair of decisions of the Hong Kong Companies Court (the “Court”) has immense potential significance for debtor companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong (“HKEx”) and their Hong Kong creditors.
Facts
Re Lamtex Holdings Ltd [2021] HKCFI 622 and Re Ping An Securities Group (Holdings) Ltd [2021] HKCFI 651 both involved a familiar factual scenario:
On 29 September 2020, the Federal Court of Australia published its much anticipated decision in Habrok (Dalgaranga) Pty Ltd v Gascoyne Resources Ltd [2020] FCA 1395, dismissing Habrok’s attempt to set aside a Deed of Company Arrangement (DOCA). The DOCA had been the culmination of a 15 month administration, and facilitated the recapitalisation, refinance, and relisting of the gold miner Gascoyne Resources Ltd (GCY) and its subsidiaries (together with GCY, the GCY Group).