随着内地与香港的经济贸易往来日益频繁，近年来破产案件中需要通过跨境破产合作解决的问题也日益增多。虽然2019年1月发布的《关于内地与香港特别行政区法院相互认可和执行民商事案件判决的安排》仍未将破产（清盘）案件包括在内，但是近年来实践中已经开始出现一些内地与香港法院互相承认对方破产（清盘）程序的效力、承认对方破产管理人（清盘人）地位的案例，这一新动向值得跨境投资者关注。
内地对香港清盘程序的态度
根据最高法2011年对《企业破产法》第五条的解释，香港法院作出的“清盘令不属于《企业破产法》下内地法院应认可和执行的境外法院的判决、裁定”。但是，最高法2014年审结的“新加坡中华环保案”为香港清盘人在内地法院审理的案件中代表被清盘公司诉讼创造了可能性。
该案原告是一家新加坡企业，已经破产并被指定了管理人。最高法院援引《涉外民事关系法律适用法》第十四条的规定，认为该案的争议问题实质是原告破产企业的代表人及其诉讼地位、相关权利的认定，应当适用原告登记地法律即新加坡法，进而认可破产管理人有权代表公司继续诉讼。根据这一裁判思路，内地法院有可能对已被清盘的香港公司适用其注册登记地法律，即香港法律，来认定香港清盘人在内地法院案件中的诉讼地位及相关权利，从而使香港清盘人有权代表被清盘公司在内地法院参加诉讼活动。
Recent Hong Kong cases have highlighted varying approaches regarding the impact of arbitration clauses on insolvency proceedings, in particular, on the Court’s discretion to make a winding-up order where a debt is disputed.
Recent judgments have varied between the so-called Traditional Approach which requires the company-debtor to show a genuine dispute on substantial grounds and the Lasmos Approach which requires the company only to commence arbitration in a timely manner.
Hong Kong Court refuses to grant an antisuit injunction to stay a winding-up petition where an arbitration agreement existed
21 August 2020
The Hong Kong Court of First Instance has dismissed an application by a British Virgin Islands (BVI) company (C) for an interim anti-suit injunction against proceedings commenced by a Cayman Islands company (D) for the winding-up of the BVI company in the High Court of the BVI.
The tragically unforeseen current novel coronavirus (COVID-19) global pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges to all aspects of Hong Kong society including the health of its citizens, the economy and the business community. Economic activities across most sectors globally are being devastated. The dire economic situation in Hong Kong has been exacerbated by the trade war between Washington and Beijing and the new national security law.
Hong Kong Court refuses to grant an antisuit injunction to stay a winding-up petition where an arbitration agreement existed
19 August 2020
The Hong Kong Court of First Instance has dismissed an application by a British Virgin Islands (BVI) company (C) for an interim anti-suit injunction against proceedings commenced by a Cayman Islands company (D) for the winding-up of the BVI company in the High Court of the BVI.
Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited CACV 158/2017 (date of judgment 5 August 2020)1
Introduction
- Introduction
Under Hong Kong law, a company shall be deemed to be unable to pay its debts if a creditor, to whom the company is indebted of at least HKD 10,000 (around USD 1,290), has served on the company a demand requiring the company to pay and the company has not done so within three weeks.
In a recent judgment, the Hong Kong Court reiterated the principles outlined in Kam Leung Sui Kwan v. Kam Kwan Lai [2015] 18 HKCFAR 501 (Yung Kee), the case concerning the famous roastgoose restaurant in the heart of Hong Kong's Central district, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to wind up a foreign-incorporated company. In this case, the court also refused to grant a stay of the petition in favor of arbitration.
Florida escape
Unlike many other common law jurisdictions, there are no insolvency relief measures solely to assist restructuring and corporate rescue in Hong Kong. However, in the recent case of Re China Oil Gangran Energy Group Holdings Ltd [2020] HKCFI 825, the Hong Kong Court confirmed its power to grant recognition and assistance to liquidators appointed in a foreign country.
When entertaining a jurisdictional challenge to wind-up a foreign company with no place of business in Hong Kong, is it a material concern that alternative remedies for unfair prejudice are available at the company’s place of incorporation but not in Hong Kong (“Question”)?