In the matter of BRS Refineries vs. . Mr. Supriyo Kumar Chaudhari, the NCLAT New Delhi upheld the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Allahabad Bench, rejecting an appeal filed by BRS Refineries. The earlier appeal had challenged the action of the liquidator for JVL Agro Industries Ltd., to forfeit the earnest money deposit (EMD) of Rs. 96 lakhs pursuant to the e-auction of the assets of JVL Agro Industries Ltd.

Five best practices for retailers to manage cash, cut costs, and stay afloat as debt comes due

In late 2017, a Bloomberg headline read, “America’s ‘Retail Apocalypse’ Is Really Just Beginning.” The main culprit, the authors suggested, was the amount of high-yield debt on company balance sheets, which would balloon just as a record wall of debt across all industries came due.

本稿では、近年のシンガポールの事業再生/倒産に関連する法・実務の発展を概観しつつ、シンガポール国際商事裁判所(以下｢SICC｣といいます。)における国際事業再生/倒産案件の取扱いについて解説します 。

1. 近年のシンガポール事業再生/倒産に関連する法・実務の発展

シンガポールは、様々なビジネス分野において東南アジア(又はグローバル)におけるハブを指向していますが(例えば、国際仲裁の分野において、シンガポール国際仲裁センター(SIAC)は国際仲裁機関として高い評価を得ています。)、事業再生/倒産の分野も例外ではありません。以下の年表からも分かるとおり、2010年代以降、政府・金融機関・実務家等が一丸となって、①グローバルスタンダードに合致し、かつ、国際倒産への対応も可能な倒産法制度を整備しつつ  、②シンガポールの裁判所を、東南アジアにおける国際事業再生/倒産案件のフォーラムとして確立しようとする動きが顕著に見られます 。

In the case of Sian Participation Corp (In Liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd (on appeal from the BVI), the Privy Council has found that Salford Estates (No.2) Limited v Altomart Limited was incorrectly decided.

This case is not only important for BVI lawyers, as the Privy Council has directed pursuant to Willers v Joyce (No 2) [2016] UKSC 44 that the decision in the present case in respect of Salford Estates now represents the law of England and Wales.

Background

In times of financial difficulty, the Personal Insolvency (Personal Repayment Plans and Debt Relief Order) Law of 2015 in Cyprus provides a structured way for debtors to manage their debts while protecting their principal residence. This law is designed to balance the interests of both debtors and creditors.

However, what happens when creditors seek to cancel these repayment plans?

In Sian Participation v. Halimeda International [2024] UKPC 16, Lords Briggs and Hamblen, delivering judgment on behalf of the Board, endorsed the traditional approach to winding-up petitions. Their Lordships confirmed that a debtor’s duty to show that the debt is genuinely disputed on substantial grounds (“Triable Issue Standard”) remains undiluted even if the contract from which the debt arose contains an arbitration clause.

High Court upholds decision that separate entities of foreign states may be immune from being wound up in Australia

Key takeouts

Under the framework of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI), an asset reconstruction company (ARC) has wide powers to revive a company facing financial difficulties. It can use securitisation, reconstruction and recovery for quick resolution of distressed debt. As an alternative, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), allows ARCs with access to a formal resolution process, which has the advantage of the borrower emerging debt-free with a clean slate.

On April 23, 2024, the American Bankruptcy Institute’s Subchapter V Task Force issued its Final Report.

This article is the eighth in a series summarizing and condensing the Task Force’s Final Report into “a nutshell.” The subject of this article is:

• whether the Subchapter V trustee or other party in interest should be allowed to file a plan after debtor’s removal from possession.[Fn. 1]

Recommendation

On June 6, the United States Supreme Court decided Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co., Inc., No. 22-1079, holding that insurers with financial responsibility for bankruptcy claims are “parties in interest” under 11 U.S.C. § 1109(b) that “may raise and may appear and be heard on any issue” in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy case.