In the wake of several high-profile collapses of cryptocurrency exchanges, most notably FTX, Celsius, and Voyager, the state of the digital asset landscape is ever-changing, with more questions and landmines than clear paths forward. Among the many issues that arise in these bankruptcy cases is the question of how to treat and classify digital assets, especially cryptocurrencies—e.g., who owns the cryptocurrencies deposited by customers.
By means of a category two Public Trustee v Cooper application, in which Jeffrey Elkinson and Britt Smith of Conyers, led by Brian Green KC, acted for the successful plaintiffs, the first plaintiff as trustee, and the second plaintiff as protector, of three family trusts1 sought to give effect to a 2018 settlement agreement reached between all of the adult beneficiaries concerning the collective assets in the trusts.
The Royal Court has recently handed down the final decision in the matter of Eagle Holdings Limited (in compulsory liquidation).[1] In this decision, the Royal Court of Guernsey provided guidance and assistance to the joint liquidators regarding a distribution of surplus funds.
In our previous article, we outlined the milestones leading up to this astonishing and unprecedented collapse that has rocked the crypto industry. Since November 11, 2022, the date on which FTX filed for Chapter 11 protection, not a week has gone by without a new twist. If you missed some of the episodes of this complicated process, here is our selection of the most interesting ones.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that because Indian tribes are indisputably governments, the Bankruptcy Code unmistakably abrogates their sovereign immunity to bankruptcy court proceedings.
Die EU-Kommission hat einen Richtlinienentwurf u.a. zur verpflichtenden Aufnahme eines „Pre-pack-Verfahrens“ in die nationalen Insolvenzgesetze vorgelegt.
On 30 May 2023, Mac-Interiors Limited (the “Company”), a private limited company incorporated and registered in Northern Ireland, but with its COMI in Ireland, presented a petition seeking the appointment of an examiner. On the same day, orders were made, amongst other things, appointing Kieran Wallace of Interpath Advisory as examiner on an interim basis pending the hearing of the Petition.
In the recent case of Genisys Integrated Engineers Pte Ltd v UEM Genisys Sdn Bhd & Ors [2023] 3 MLJ 627, the Federal Court had the occasion to consider whether the Limitation Act 1953 applies to a proof of debt. The Federal Court held that the Limitation Act 1953 does not apply to a proof of debt which is accepted and not formally rejected by a liquidator.
Background Facts
Jedem Anfang wohnt ein Zauber inne oder in jedem Ende liegt der Charme des Neuanfangs (sehr frei nach Hermann Hesse).
Entsprechend dem Grundgedanken in Hermann Hesses Ausspruch bedeuten die zahlreichen, durch die COVID-19-Pandemie verursachten Unternehmenskrisen nicht nur ein Ende, sondern bieten auch Chancen.