A recent decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) has extended the liability of legal advisors in crisis situations.

Background

Under German law, a lawyer may be liable not only to his client, but also to a third party, if the third party has a special interest in the lawyer's performance. The Bundesgerichtshof has clarified that managing directors and even shadow directors may have such a special interest and may claim damages from their company’s legal advisor for breach of duty (Pflichtverletzung).

What matters

This article delves into some key considerations for suppliers when dealing with customers where there may be a risk of non-payment or insolvency circumstances and how a supplier can minimise the risk to their cash flow and business.

What matters next

What is the Doctrine of Exoneration?

The doctrine of exoneration concerns the issue of a loan against a jointly-held property. It will apply when the borrowed funds secured against the property are only for the benefit of one party. Thus, this doctrine is able to change the respective interests in property ownership when an interest in the asset is created by one party.

Fact Scenario Example

Austria implemented the directive on preventive restructuring frameworks more than two years ago, in July 2021. In a first ruling on the proceedings, the Vienna Higher Regional Court has reaffirmed the prerequisites for entering preventive restructuring and clarified the checks to be carried out by the courts at the opening of the proceedings.

Decision

The Court held that:

On 4 May 2023, the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) delivered a landmark judgment in Guy Kwok-Hung Lam (Respondent) -v- Tor Asia Credit Master Fund LP (Appellant) Final Appeal No.13 of 2022 (on appeal from CACV No. 393 of 2021 [2023 HKCFA 9) (“Re Guy Kwok-Hung Lam”).

On 12 September 2023, the government published its long-awaited response to its consultation on the future of insolvency regulation.

The reforms will introduce:

Sam Bankman-Fried is scheduled to be tried on eight charges starting on 3 October 2023, and US District Judge Lewis Kaplan has allowed for a second trial on 11 March 2024 on a further five charges that include bribing Chinese officials and committing financial fraud. The charges centre around the alleged fraud and conspiracy to defraud crypto investors and customers in FTX and Alameda Research.

This article considers the New South Wales Supreme Court’s decision to grant leave to proceed against non-appearing foreign defendants, which were in foreign insolvency proceedings.

There has been a significant growth of litigation in Australia where there is at least one foreign defendant. This is unsurprising given the growing number of international agreements under which the parties govern their contract under Australian law and expressly agree to Australian court jurisdiction, and the volume of global trade with Australia and foreign direct investment.

1. INTRODUCTION A liquidation preference right is a preferential right provided to financial investors, generally to secure their equity finance investments. Such a right (in its various forms) is generally provided irrespective of the stage of investment (be it a preliminary seed round of funding, or a growth stage funding round). What may differ is the manner of liquidation preference provided to the right holders.

In contrast to a case under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, which centralizes a company’s debt adjustment efforts in the U.S. and provides for expansive oversight and supervision by a U.S. court, a Chapter 15 recognition proceeding is an ancillary proceeding in which the U.S. court acknowledges the foreign proceeding and gives it effect under applicable U.S. law.