SU M M ER 2 02 1 | I F LR .C O M | 1 T he Hong Kong Companies Court has made a number of rulings concerning mainland Chinese corporate groups listed in Hong Kong SAR which illustrate the evolving landscape of cross-border insolvency law.These cases may, in some instances, cause creditors and debtors to re-evaluate some of the enforcement and defensive strategies traditionally used in the insolvencies of such companies.
Introduction
Rather unfortunately, there are no statutory provisions available to a company to set aside a statutory demand. If a company is served with a statutory demand and disputes the alleged debt, save for agreeing with the alleged creditor not to present a winding-up petition, it has no alternative but to seek relief from the court and obtain an injunction restraining the presentation of a winding-up petition.
In May 2021, a landmark co-operation mechanism was implemented between Hong Kong and Mainland China in cross-border insolvency matters.
Liquidators from Hong Kong can now apply to the courts in three Mainland "pilot cities" (ie Shanghai, Shenzhen and Xiamen) for recognition and assistance, provided that:
Grand Peace Group Holdings Limited [2021] HKCFI 2361 (Date of Decision: 24 August 2021)
Up Energy Development Group Limited [2021] HKCFI 2595 (Date of Decision: 31 August 2021)
Introduction
The vast majority of listed companies in Hong Kong are incorporated offshore, with a corporate structure that the operating and asset owning subsidiaries in Mainland China are held through intermediate subsidiaries incorporated in offshore jurisdictions such as BVI and Cayman Islands etc.
The Hong Kong High Court has handed down its first decision under the pilot measure in relation to the cooperation mechanism for mutual recognition of, and assistance to, insolvency processes between Mainland China and Hong Kong, in Re Samson Paper Company Limited [2021] HKCFI 2151.
Cooperation mechanism
Before 14 May 2021, there was no procedure between Mainland China and Hong Kong for mutual recognition of insolvency processes. This situation changed on 14 May 2021.
簡介
我們於7月的清盤及重組文章中，介紹了中國最高人民法院（「最高人民法院」）與香港律政司司長於2021年5月14日簽署《最高人民法院與香港特別行政區政府關於內地與香港特別行政區法院相互認可和協助破產程序的會談紀要》（「合作機制」），當中訂明了香港法院與深圳、上海及廈門三個試點地區的中級人民法院相互認可破產的程序和人員安排的具體程序。
Introduction
On 14 May 2021, a cooperation mechanism was established between the Mainland and Hong Kong in the form of the Record of Meeting of the Supreme People's Court and the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and Mutual Recognition of and Assistance to Bankruptcy (Insolvency) Proceedings between the Court of the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Supreme People’s Court’s Opinion on taking forward a pilot measure in relation to Recognition and Assistance to Bankruptcy (Insolvency) Proceedings in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Re
When the Petitioner issued the petition to wind up the Company on 12 January 2021, the Company was already subject to another winding up petition in HCCW 410/2019 and the Petitioner was aware of the first petition. The Court reiterated that a creditor should not issue a petition if a petition has already been issued against the relevant debtor company. The Petitioner argued that there are exceptional circumstances, which justified the second petition: Re China Greenfresh Group Co Ltd [2021] HKCFI 36. It was said that the progress of the first petition was dilatory.