Under Hong Kong law, the terms “insolvency”, “liquidation” or “winding-up” are used with reference to companies, and “bankruptcy” is used in relation to individuals. The former are primarily regulated by Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions Ordinance) (CWUO) (Cap. 32), and the latter by the Bankruptcy Ordinance (Cap 6). The article below focuses on the corporate insolvency regime, in relation to financially distressed companies which are unable to pay their debts or discharge their payment obligations.
簡介
最近在Re Hsin Chong Construction Co., Ltd. [2021] HKCFA 14一案中，終審法院推翻了原訟法庭及上訴法庭（「上訴庭」）的裁決。與上訴庭及原訟法庭的裁決相反，終審法院裁定，於新昌開始清盤後出售其在合營協議項下剩餘權利及權益的交易是無效的。
背景
新昌營造廠有限公司（「該公司」）及Build King Construction Limited（「Build King」）於2013年11月訂立一份合營協議（「合營協議」），以成立及經營一間合營公司（「合營公司」）。合營公司於2016年6月獲得一項大型政府項目合約，其中該公司佔65% 權益，Build King佔餘下35% 權益。
該公司於2017/2018年度開始面臨財政困難。2018年8月27日，該公司被入稟清盤，導致該公司的銀行帳戶被凍結。
Introduction
In the recent case of Re Hsin Chong Construction Co., Ltd. [2021] HKCFA 14, the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) overturned the decisions of the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal (“CA”) below. The CFA found, contrary to the CA and Court of First Instance, that the disposition of Hsin Chong’s residual rights and interests under a joint venture agreement after the commencement of winding up was void.
Background
简介
最近在Re Hsin Chong Construction Co., Ltd. [2021] HKCFA 14一案中，终审法院推翻了原讼法庭及上诉法庭（「上诉庭」）的裁决。与上诉庭及原讼法庭的裁决相反，终审法院裁定，于新昌开始清盘后出售其在合营协议项下剩余权利及权益的交易是无效的。
背景
新昌营造厂有限公司（「该公司」）及Build King Construction Limited（「Build King」）于2013年11月订立一份合营协议（「合营协议」），以成立及经营一间合营公司（「合营公司」）。合营公司于2016年6月获得一项大型政府项目合约，其中该公司占65% 权益，Build King占余下35% 权益。
该公司于2017/2018年度开始面临财政困难。2018年8月27日，该公司被入禀清盘，导致该公司的银行帐户被冻结。
In two recent judgments, the Hong Kong companies court has set out the principles applicable to winding up companies holding operating subsidiaries in the mainland through intermediate subsidiaries incorporated offshore, most commonly in the BVI. In doing so, the Honourable Mr. Justice Harris highlighted the need for the petitioner to demonstrate a "real and discernible benefit" to creditors, something which will be challenging to prove if the company’s centre of main interests is not in Hong Kong.
As discussed in our previous blog post, the decision for provisional liquidators to apply for directions on the distribution of funds can be a difficult one to make.
香港法院首次认可并协助在内地启动并由内地法院指定破产管理人的破产程序案件是Re CEFC Shanghai International Group Limited [2020] HKCFI 167。随着破产重整制度的最新发展，香港法院在 Re HNA Group Co Limited [2021] HKCFI 2897案件中进一步加强跨境重整合作，夏利士法官亦首次认可内地的重整程序 (“裁决”)。
背景
在中国海南注册成立的海航集团有限公司 (“公司”) 是海航集团的控股公司。作为一家业务多元化的国内企业集团，海航集团投资组合涵盖航空、房地产、旅游和金融服务等领域。尽管它曾一度是世界上最活跃的投资集团之一，该集团在 2021 年因债务重整失败而宣布破产，陷入了危机。海南银行以公司资不抵债为由向海南省高级人民法院 (“海南法院”) 申请了破产重整。
根据《企业破产法》及最高人民法院的规定，海南法院于2021年2月10日颁发了重整命令 (“海南命令”)。管理人员，包括北京律师和海南省法制办公室的一名官员，被任命为清算管理人。同一命令规定公司集团的某些成员可以在管理人的监视权力下继续管理其资产和业务。
The very first case that the Hong Kong Court recognised and granted assistance to bankruptcy administrators appointed by the Mainland Chinese courts in insolvency proceedings commenced in Mainland China in Re CEFC Shanghai International Group Limited [2020] HKCFI 167. Following the latest developments in the insolvency and restructuring regime, the Hong Kong Court has made further strides towards the enhanced cross-border restructuring cooperation in Re HNA Group Co Limited [2021] HKCFI 2897, in which the Honourable Mr.
In Re Samson Paper Holdings Ltd[2021] HKCFI 3288, the Honourable Mr. Justice Harris sanctioned a scheme of arrangement notwithstanding that there were proposed modifications after the relevant scheme meeting.
The Hong Kong Court of First Instance recognised the reorgansation proceedings of a company based in the PRC for the first time in Hong Kong in Re HNA Group Co Limited [2021] HKCFI 2897.
Background