This note updates a series of Tanner De Witt articles on the interaction between dispute resolution clauses and the Court’s insolvency jurisdiction. The previous articles are:
A first in the UK – a restructuring plan under Part 26A to the Companies Act 2006 (Restructuring Plan) has been proposed by a project company in a private finance initiative (PFI) project after a convening hearing was held in the High Court in late May.
The Restructuring Plan seeks to compromise both current and future liabilities arising from a PFI project agreement with an NHS Trust. The hearing to sanction the plan will now be held in July.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion is Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co., Inc., Case No. 22-1079, Decided June 6, 2024.
Opinion’s Q & A
The Truck Insurance question is this:
- Whether an insurer with financial responsibility for a bankruptcy claim is a “party in interest” under § 1109(b)?
The Supreme Court’s answer is this:
On 29 April 2024, the Italian Supreme Court issued its judgment in case No. 11357, ruling on the right of usufruct on the quotas of a limited liability company in voluntary liquidation.
In this alert, we consider the implications from the recent High Court judgment finding two former directors of BHS liable for various heads of wrongdoing, including wrongful trading and "misfeasant trading".
What Directors need to know
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that the anti-modification provision in the federal Bankruptcy Code applies to loans secured by mixed-use real properties, such as the large parcel at issue here which functioned both for commercial use and as the debtor’s principal residence.
A copy of the opinion in Lee v. U.S. Bank National Association is available at: Link to Opinion.
From the West Coast Healthcare Deskis an ongoing series of Holland & Knight Healthcare Blog articles and alerts focused on healthcare industry developments and points of interest in the West Coast healthcare marketplace. Holland & Knight's nationally ranked healthcare practice has been focused on healthcare compliance, transactional, reimbursement and operational trends that have often started in California before spreading nationwide – managed care and various capitated and quality-based reimbursement models being the most obvious examples.
In my December 2022 article, I predicted that when insolvencies started to surge in the Australian economy, the worst casualties would likely be in construction.1 It’s taken a while for my predicted post-COVID day of reckoning to arrive in Australia. But it is here.
导言
股东出资加速到期，是与注册资本认缴制紧密关联、对股东的法定出资期限利益进行限制与收回的“反向”制度。本次公司法修订中，该制度被深度重塑。
一方面，该制度的相关规定不再分散于其他法律、司法解释、会议纪要等文件中，而是首次明确规定于《公司法》中。另一方面，也是更为重要的是，本次制度调整是在资本制度改革的大背景下完成的。本次公司法修订的一大亮点是资本制度的系统化改革和完善，在股东出资层面主要包括有限公司收紧为五年内限期认缴制、股份公司重回实缴制、增加股东未按期缴纳出资的催缴失权制度、新增非破产情形下股东出资加速到期制度、明确股权转让后转让人和受让人的责任等，其中任何一项制度的改变均与其他制度的变化息息相关。
本文的目的在于揭示新《公司法》资本制度系统性调整的背景下，规则之间的内在联系和互动关系，帮助读者更好地整体性理解股东出资加速到期相关新规。
一、“股东出资加速到期”的两类情形
股东出资加速到期是注册资本认缴制下，为保护公司及债权人利益而限制股东期限利益的特殊公司法制度，[1]具体指在特定情形下，出资期限未届满且未完全实缴的股东，丧失原有的出资期限利益，需要提前缴纳出资。
This compendium presents a curated collection of judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Securities Appellate Tribunal ("SAT") from 2019 to 2024. Established to hear and dispose of appeals against orders passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), and the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA), SAT plays a pivotal role in shaping the regulatory landscape of the financial and securities markets in India.