2016年破産倒産法および2013年会社法の下、会社法審判所(NCLT)の命令に対しては、会社法上訴審判所(NCLAT)に上訴することができます。上訴期間は、破産倒産法においては最長45日、会社法においては最長90日、となっています。また、2016年NCLAT規則(NCLAT規則)において、上訴または上訴時の添付文書に欠陥があることが判明した場合、上訴を行った当事者は、7日以内に欠陥を修復し、上訴を「再提示(re-present)」しなければならないと規定されています。なお、当該期間は、当事者が十分な理由を示した場合、妥当な期間延長することができます。
Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. NCLAT: Moratorium under Section 14 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is no bar for initiation of proceedings under Section 66 of the IBC. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (“NCLAT”) has in its judgment dated August 4, 2022 in the matter of Rakesh Kumar Jain v. Jagdish Singh Nain and Others [Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.
The 5 (five) judge bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) has recently decided the long- standing issue of whether re-presentation of appeal constitutes a fresh filing before the NCLAT and its implication on the period of limitation. The NCLAT has held, inter alia, that ‘re-filing’ an appeal (after curing defects) beyond the prescribed 7 (seven) days period will not amount to a ‘fresh filing’ for the purposes of the limitation.
Facts
India has a vast coastline and easy access to shipping routes, yet India contributes only 1% in global trade.[1] Many major shipowners and operators have chosen key international maritime centres such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Dubai as their base for operations.
©Anderson Mori & Tomotsune 2022 年 9 月 1．【メキシコ】倒産事件処理のための特別裁判所の新設 1. はじめに 2022 年 3 月 4 日、倒産事件を特別に管轄する 2 つの裁判所がいずれもメキシコシティに新設され1 、既に運 用されている。 本稿ではメキシコの倒産法と従前より倒産事件を管轄してきた裁判所について簡潔に説明し、上記の新たな 倒産裁判所の概要と倒産法制上の意味合いを解説する。 2. メキシコの倒産法について メキシコの倒産法は、連邦法である Ley de Concursos Mercantiles （以下「メキシコ倒産法」または「法」とす る。）である。日本法と異なり、破産手続も民事再生手続も単独の法律により定められている。メキシコ倒産法は 2 段階方式を採用している2 。すなわち、原則として、第 1 段階として再生手続(conciliación)が開始され、第 2 段階 として破産手続(quiebra)が開始されうる建付けとなっている3。その目的規定においても、債務超過企業の再建 を図ることの重要性が強調されている4 。
The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has on 21 September 2022 released the Indian Telecommunication Bill, 2022 (Bill) which consolidates and amends the Indian Telegraph Act 1885, Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act 1933, and The Telegraph Wires, (Unlawful Protection) Act 1950. In Chapter 5 (Restructuring, Defaults in Payment and Insolvency), the Bill addresses situations wherein payment defaults or insolvency proceedings have been initiated against a telecommunication company (Telco or Corporate Debtor).
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was enacted to facilitate insolvency resolution in a timebound manner, and maximise value realisation for stakeholders. Although it has been amended 6 times since its notification, issues remain. As the Legislature appears set to amend the Code once again, this article examines stakeholders’ issues and explores the issues the amendments may address.
Introduction
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) on 16 September 2022 promulgated the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (Fourth Amendment) Regulations, 2022 (CIRP Amendment Regulations) amending the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (CIRP Regulations).
The key amendments introduced by the CIRP Amendment Regulations are as follows:
The Polyvocal Court
In its decision in Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd., a bench of three Judges of the Supreme Court held that “Harmonious construction of clause (10) of Section 3 of the I&B Code read with clauses (20) and (21) of Section 5 thereof would reveal, that even a claim in respect of dues arising under any law for the time being in force and payable to the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority would come within the ambit of ‘operational debt’.