In SwissMarineCorporation Ltd v OW Supply & Trading[1], the High Court refused to grant an anti-suit injunction restraining Danish insolvency proceedings. This case provides a useful discussion of the circumstances in which the court are likely to grant an anti-suit injunction, and in particular where there are jurisdiction issues involving elements of both civil and insolvency proceedings.
For the benefit of our clients and friends investing in European distressed opportunities, our European Network is sharing some current developments.
Recent Developments
Background
Administration
Administration is a procedure by which a company can be reorganised and its assets realised whilst being protected by a moratorium from actions brought by creditors (explained below).
Objectives
A company can be put into administration if the objectives of administration are likely to be achieved. These are set out in the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Act”)4 as:
In 2008, the catastrophic effect of the credit crunch spread to most world economies. As in previous recessions, insolvency has affected increasing numbers of individuals and companies, and parties to agreements to arbitrate are increasingly likely to find themselves dealing with insolvent companies. What are the issues to bear in mind?
1/ Prior insolvency
An examination of the impact of an insolvent respondent in an arbitration.
In 2008, the catastrophic effect of the credit crunch spread to most world economies, touching governments, companies and individuals alike. As in previous recessions, insolvency is affecting increasing numbers of individuals and companies. UK government figures show that individual insolvencies went up by 8.8% in the third quarter of 2008, with corporate liquidations up by 10.5% in the same period. Commentators predict that this trend will only accelerate through 2009.
A number of recent High Court cases have highlighted the difficulties being faced by receivers in taking possession of agricultural lands. This is a critical issue for receivers who are being faced with mounting costs and delay as a result of the actions of uncooperative borrowers and / or their agents. The cases have highlighted the potential need for greater judicial resources and better and more vigorous case management.
Receivers appointed over agricultural lands are increasingly resorting to the High Court in order to:
Introduction
The role of Jersey as a financial centre means that on occasions there will be a requirement for a foreign liquidator or an office-holder under bankruptcy legislation to obtain information or documentation from persons or companies located in the Island. There have been a series of recent court decisions establishing the appropriate levels of co-operation with other jurisdictions.
This update discusses an issue that may arise in relation to the recognition of foreign bankruptcies where the law of the receiving state does not provide for admittance proceedings. This issue recently arose in the Yukos proceedings.
Facts
Análisis GA&P | Diciembre 2014 1 1. ¿Alcanza el efecto de paralización de ejecuciones sobre bienes necesarios del deudor que realiza la comunicación del artículo 5 bis de la Ley Concursal a la efectividad de una medida cautelar acordada contra el patrimonio del deudor? Respuesta: En principio, la mera efectividad de una medida cautelar no puede quedar comprendida en la paralización de las ejecuciones judiciales de bienes o derechos, pues única y exclusivamente está preordenada a garantizar la tutela de fondo que se pide.