In recent years the Hong Kong Companies Court has dealt with a large number of applications for recognition and assistance from the Courts of various overseas jurisdictions in relation to cross border insolvency matters. The Court will now routinely grant orders of recognition and assistance to liquidators of companies incorporated in Commonwealth jurisdictions such as the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands, which are all common law jurisdictions which have insolvency law regimes which are in many ways similar to Hong Kong’s own regime.
The Hong Kong Court of First Instance has declined to prioritise an arbitration agreement where a debtor intended to dispute the existence of a debt without proving there was a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds.
Dayang (HK) Marine Shipping Co., Ltd v. Asia Master Logistics Ltd [2020] HKCFI 311; HCCW 14/2019
Background
The principle in ex parte James, under which the Court will not permit its officers (such as a liquidator) to act in a way which, although lawful, does not accord with the standards of right-thinking people, has recently been clarified by the English Court of Appeal in Lehman Brothers Australia Limited (in liquidation) v Edward John Macnamara & others (the joint administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration)) [2020] EWCA Civ 321
Introduction
COVID-19 is likely to materially impact the financial position of many companies. It is therefore important for directors to consider whether there are any additional statutory or common law duties that they need to consider in the context of their companies facing financial difficulty.
The Court of First Instance has recently helpfully summarised the legal position on schemes of arrangement under both Hong Kong law and English law. Notably, it has called for further development in cross-border coordination in order to avoid the trouble of parallel insolvency proceedings and it has raised a red flag in relation to detailed disclosure of restructuring costs: Da Yu Financial Holdings Limited [2019] HKCFI 2531.
Reconsidering the Lasmos approach to winding-up petitions involving arbitration clauses.
近年市场竞争及经营环境不确定性持续增加的情况下,不少企业有可能面临营运及财务困难,导致债务违约的情况有上升的趋势。如果债务人资不抵债,债权人有权利用破产清盘的程序接管债务人的资产并尽量实现回收最大化。根据香港破产管理署公布的统计数字,在2019年1月至10月期间,强制公司清盘案及破产案呈请的数字达到7,062宗。我们藉此介绍近期香港法院就破产清盘颁发的两个重要判决。
1. 仲裁协议的存在是否会影响破产清盘程序的开展?
香港上诉法院近期在But Ka Chon v Interactive Brokers LLC [2019] HKCA 873一案中,考虑了债权相关的合同中约定有仲裁条款管辖的情况下,债权人利用法院破产清盘程序的权利会否受限。由于很多的商业协议均载有仲裁条款,法院的判决对债权人的权利及可采取的救济手段有重要意义。
在该案中,上诉人(证券公司客户,即债务人)与被上诉人(证券公司,即债权人)签订的客户协议约定双方之间的争议以仲裁解决。由于上诉人没有偿还保证金账户的欠款,债权人在香港法院申请上诉人破产。上诉人以双方已经约定仲裁为其中一个理由,请求上诉法院撤销债权人发出的法定偿债书。
近年市场竞争及经营环境不确定性持续增加的情况下,不少企业有可能面临营运及财务困难,导致债务违约的情况有上升的趋势。如果债务人资不抵债,债权人有权利用破产清盘的程序接管债务人的资产并尽量实现回收最大化。根据香港*破产管理署公布的统计数字,在2019年1月至10月期间,强制公司清盘案及破产案呈请的数字达到7,062宗。我们藉此介绍近期香港法院就破产清盘颁发的两个重要判决。
1. 仲裁协议的存在是否会影响破产清盘程序的开展?
香港上诉法院近期在But Ka Chon v Interactive Brokers LLC [2019] HKCA 873一案中,考虑了债权相关的合同中约定有仲裁条款管辖的情况下,债权人利用法院破产清盘程序的权利会否受限。由于很多的商业协议均载有仲裁条款,法院的判决对债权人的权利及可采取的救济手段有重要意义。
在该案中,上诉人(证券公司客户,即债务人)与被上诉人(证券公司,即债权人)签订的客户协议约定双方之间的争议以仲裁解决。由于上诉人没有偿还保证金账户的欠款,债权人在香港法院申请上诉人破产。上诉人以双方已经约定仲裁为其中一个理由,请求上诉法院撤销债权人发出的法定偿债书。
With growing competition and global market uncertainties in recent years, businesses may experience operational and financial challenges, resulting in debt defaults. A creditor is entitled to petition for the bankruptcy and liquidate the debtor’s assets in order to try to achieve a maximum recovery. Statistics published by the Official Receiver’s Office noted 7,062 petitions for compulsory liquidation and bankruptcy between January and October 2019. In this client alert, we discuss two significant and recent judgments in respect of insolvency law given by the Hong Kong* courts.
Just in time for the Chinese New Year, a Hong Kong court has taken a major step forward in the developing law on cross-border insolvency by recognizing a mainland Chinese liquidation for the first time. In the Joint and Several Liquidators of CEFC Shanghai International Group Ltd [2020] HKCFI 167, Mr. Justice Harris granted recognition and assistance to mainland administrators in Hong Kong so they could perform their functions and protect assets held in Hong Kong from enforcement.