On 4 and 5 May 2021, the Supreme Court heard an appeal in BTI 2104 LLC v Sequana SA and others [2022] UKSC 25 and this week it gave its judgment. The length of the time taken to issue the judgment reflects both the complexity of the issues involved and the importance of the questions raised for company law in the UK.
Kate Colman, Sarah Levin and Ryan Al-Hakim, Milbank LLP
This is an extract from the third edition of GRR's The Art of the Ad Hoc. The whole publication is available here.
Introduction
In the recent decision of Somesh Choudhary v. Knight Riders Sports Private Limited & Ors., the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi has held that claims arising from the grant of an exclusive right and license to use intellectual property rights falls within the definition of “operational debt” under Section 5(21) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).
Background Facts
The Supreme Court has handed down its long-awaited judgment in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25.
Basic facts
In a recent decision, a 3 (three) judge bench of the High Court of Bombay (“Bombay High Court”) in the case of Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Anr. v. Joint Commissioner of Sales & Anr, has held that the dues of secured creditors would rank superior to dues of state government upon sale of a secured asset under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act”) and Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (“RDDB Act”).
Ross Miller, Simmons & Simmons LLP
This is an extract from the third edition of GRR's The Art of the Ad Hoc. The whole publication is available here.
Introduction
Kon Asimacopoulos and Gabe Harley, Kirkland & Ellis International LLP
This is an extract from the third edition of GRR's The Art of the Ad Hoc. The whole publication is available here.
Introduction
Darren Azman and Natalie Rowles, McDermott Will & Emery
This is an extract from the third edition of GRR's The Art of the Ad Hoc. The whole publication is available here.
Introduction
Overview of corporate insolvency in Australia
On 28 September 2022, the Federal Government, through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services (the Committee) commenced an inquiry into the effectiveness of Australia’s corporate insolvency laws in protecting and maximising value for the benefit of all interested parties and the economy.
The UK High Court has ruled that the obligations of third-party guarantors are not affected by a part 26A restructuring plan being sanctioned in respect of the underlying obligations. This approach mirrors the way guarantees are dealt with in a part 26 scheme of arrangement.
The case of Oceanfill Ltd. v Nuffield Health Wellbeing Ltd & Cannons Group Limited examined whether a restructuring plan under part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (the “Act”) had the effect of releasing liability arising under a third-party guarantee.