Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee (“BLRC”) was very clear while setting out the objectives of the new insolvency law for the country and speedy resolution/decision making in an insolvency situation was stated to be one of such foremost objectives. Fragmented laws governing an insolvency and lack of a cohesive framework governing the rights of various stakeholders during insolvency was identified as a primary reason for inefficiency of the pre-existing legal framework.

我们在前面的文章中介绍了航运企业跨境破产时与船舶扣押相关的法律问题（参见：视点 | 航运企业跨境破产与船舶扣押的冲突与协调——海事海商X破产系列文章（四），实际上司法实务中，国内法院在处理破产航运企业船舶扣押和拍卖时存在的争议同样不少，破产法律和海商事法律在对船舶的保全和执行问题上产生了交叉和冲突，给司法实践带来诸多困境。本文将结合我们承办的有关案例、其他典型案例和实务界的研究成果，对国内法院破产程序中的船舶扣押和拍卖问题进行讨论。

一、破产程序中船舶扣押与拍卖问题的司法实务样本

对于破产程序中船舶扣押与拍卖的问题，司法实践存在不同的处理模式，主要包括：

（一）因船舶优先权提起的诉讼，已进入拍卖程序的船舶，不中止执行

This writer recently encountered a case: a company (hereinafter referred to as “Company A”) with a large amount of registered capital, felling such large, registered capital was unnecessary, reduced it. In the process of reduction, the capital reduction information was only announced in local newspaper but not notified to every single creditor. One shareholder of Company A is a limited partnership (hereinafter referred to as “Partnership B”).

This morning, the Supreme Court decided Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co., which clarifies that any party with a "direct financial stake in the outcome" of a reorganization has standing as a "party in interest" to object to a Chapter 11 plan. 11 U.S.C. 1109(b). Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Sotomayor held that the debtor's insurer has standing to object even if the plan purports to preserve the insurer's legal rights and thus is said to be "insurance neutral."

Switzerland has a reputation for high-quality banking – holding significant foreign assets and offering a fairly pro-enforcement regime. However, gaps between the different legal cultures means recovering Swiss assets to satisfy foreign judgments from common law jurisdictions may be difficult . Here, we investigate possible solutions.

Supreme Court Case 5A_999/2022 dated 20 February 2024

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("the Code" & “IBC”) has been widely acclaimed as a transformative legislative framework in India, representing a significant departure from previous insolvency laws by emphasizing efficient resolution processes and the professionalization of insolvency services.

The much-anticipated BHS judgment is here.

For those without the time to digest all 533 pages immediately, we have summarised the key points below:

Introduction

In the dynamic and rapidly evolving global marketplace, particularly in fast-growing economies like India, there are ever-growing commercial transactions amongst entities within India as also in international transactions amongst entities within India and outside of India.

On June 6, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated decision in Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser GypsumCo., Inc., et al. No. 22-1079. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Sotomayor,¹ the Court vacated a Fourth Circuit decision and ruled in favor of Truck Insurance Exchange, confirming that an insurer with financial responsibility for a bankruptcy claim is a "party in interest" and therefore has standing to object to a Chapter 11 plan.

The Employment (Collective Redundancies and Miscellaneous Provisions) and Companies (Amendment) Act 2024 (Act) has been signed into law but awaits a commencement order to bring it into operation.

In summary, the Act amends the Companies Act 2014 (Companies Act) by modifying the attribution test for related companies to contribute to the debts of the company being wound up, broadening the operative time for unfair preferences, and varying the test for reckless trading.

1. Related company contribution