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.
“…it is fallacious and unrealistic for the Company to assume that the value of the Haitian Shares remained the same from February to August 2019. Between February and August 2019, Haitian Energy had published no less than nine announcements suggest that the financial condition of Haitian Energy was in a state of flux, and that the value of the Haitian Shares was susceptible to fluctuation.”
– William Wong SC (Deputy High Court Judge in Re Victor River Ltd)
INTRODUCTION
Slotine explains the steps and stakeholders involved in creditors’ voluntary winding-up and directors’ voluntary winding-up of an insolvent company in Hong Kong.
In Re Samson Paper Co Ltd [2021] HKCFI 2151, the Hong Kong Court issued for the first time a letter of request to the Shenzhen Bankruptcy Court requesting the latter to recognise and assist Hong Kong liquidators.
In recent years, there has been an increasing trend for different creditors to issue multiple petitions against the same debtor company. This may be due to the large number of listed companies in Hong Kong encountering financial difficulties during this period of economic downturn, or simply a lack of knowledge of the law in this area.
In May 2021, we published an article, Milestone in Hong Kong-Mainland China cross border insolvency: Mutual recognition of and assistance to Insolvency Proceedings between Hong Kong and Mainland China, which highlighted the key features of the cooperation mechanism in relation to Hong Kong-Mainland China cross border insolvency set out in the Record of Meeting of the Supreme Peopl
2021年5月11日，最高人民法院發佈了《關於開展認可和協助香港特別行政區破產程式試點工作的意見》（以下簡稱《試點意見》）。
《試點意見》指定上海市、福建省廈門市、廣東省深圳市人民法院開展認可和協助香港破產程式的試點工作。
《試點意見》規定了認可和協助的程式範圍。根據《試點意見》第二條規定，香港破產程式是指依據香港特別行政區《公司（清盤及雜項條文）條例》《公司條例》進行的集體清償程式，也就是該破產程式針對的是公司而不包括個人，破產程式的性質是“集體清償程式”。
《試點意見》明確了申請主體和受理法院。《試點意見》第五條規定認可和協助香港破產程式的申請主體為香港管理人。依據《試點意見》審理的跨境破產協助案件，由試點地區的中級人民法院管轄。向兩個以上有管轄權的人民法院提出申請的，由最先立案的人民法院管轄。
Ⅰ TOPICS
今後のセミナー等の情報
◆AMT グレーターチャイナセミナー
当事務所では、中国メインランド、香港、台湾について、各専門家が各分野のトピックについて解説を行うシリーズ 講座（オンラインセミナー）を開催しております。今後数回の予定は次の通りです。具体的なテーマ及び日程には 変更が生じる可能性がありますので、正確な情報は直近のメールでのご案内をご覧ください。なお、本セミナーは 本ニュースレターの受信を頂いている皆様方を中心にご案内させていただいております。 第 8 回（中国メインランド）：2021 年 8 月 26 日（木）14：00 外資企業の中国進出にかかる実務的検討～外商投資法施行後の影響を踏まえて～ 講師：アソシエイト弁護士 尾関 麻帆 上海オフィス顧問 銭 一帆
经营本地业务之香港注册公司的清盘呈请个案现时占少数。此外，我每周都会收到一些在离岸司法管辖区注册成立并且在本地上市的公司的“温和”临时清盘人在申请认可和协助时拟采用 Z-Obee 一案的技巧…”
--- 夏利士法官（中国汇源果汁集团有限公司案 [2020]HKCFI 2940 at [55]）（裁决日期：2020 年 11 月 19 日）
跨境破产在香港日益活跃。以上引述的一段话说明了香港公司法院原讼法庭处理的清盘和破产程序案件很大部分源于申请承认及向外国清盘人提供协助。
早前发布的客户简报（原文见此处）探讨了向香港法院申请将外国公司强制清盘的问题。本客户简报考虑另一个问题， 就是香港法院对该外国公司注册成立的司法管辖区所发出的清盘令可以给予的承认和协助。
一般原则 香港並非《联合国国际贸易法委员会国际商事仲裁示范法》(UNCITRAL Model Law)的签署方，也没有制定该法例。承认和协助外国破产程序的权力源自普通法。
以下为典型的事实例子：一家无力偿债的公司在香港境外（通常为热门的离岸司法管辖区）注册成立但其资产位于香港。该公司的海外注册地批准就清盘呈请颁布清盘令，并任命临时清盘人。临时清盘人随后向香港法院申请“承认”该海外命令，使该清盘令通过香港法院授予的“协助”在香港具有域外适用性。
“Since the court resumed hearings in May [2020] more than half the petitions I have heard have involved listed companies. Remarkably petitions to wind-up Hong Kong incorporated companies operating domestic businesses are currently a minority. In addition I have received weekly applications for recognition and assistance by soft-touch provisional liquidators of companies incorporated in one of the offshore jurisdictions and listed here intending to use the Z-Obee technique …”