Sinds 1 januari 2021 zijn de Europese insolventieverordening en Brussel Ibis Verordening niet langer van toepassing op het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Bovendien voorziet de handels- en samenwerkingsovereenkomst tussen de EU en het VK niet in een specifiek erkennings- of tenuitvoerleggingsmechanisme met betrekking tot grensoverschrijdende insolventie- en herstructureringsprocedures na Brexit. De vraag rijst dus of en onder welke voorwaarden Belgische rechtbanken Engelse schemes of arrangement en restructuring plans zullen erkennen na Brexit.
Since 1 January 2021, the European Insolvency Regulation and the Brussels I Recast Regulation no longer apply to the United Kingdom. In addition, the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement does not provide any specific recognition or enforcement mechanism in relation to cross-border insolvency and restructuring proceedings following Brexit. The question thus arises if and under which conditions Belgian courts will continue to recognise UK schemes of arrangement and restructuring plans post Brexit.
Ⓒ Nishimura & Asahi 2021 - 1 - 執筆者： E-mail 杉山 泰成 E-mail 坂本 龍一 Ⅰ はじめに ファクタリングは売掛その他の金銭債権を利用した資金調達手段としてメジャーなものであり、昨年来の新型コロナウイルス感 染症の広がりの影響を受けてはおりますが、世界的にその市場規模は拡張を続けており、FCI(Factors Chain International)によれ ば、アジア地域の市場規模は約 6400 億ユーロであり、これは世界市場の約 25%を占めます。アジア地域の中でも、中国の規模は 約 4330 億ユーロと圧倒的ですが、それを除けば、日本が約 500 億ユーロなのに対して、面積としては遙かに小さい香港が日本 に匹敵する約 450 億ユーロの市場規模を持つなど 1 、大変ファクタリングが盛んな地域であることが分かります。本ニューズレター では、このようなファクタリング市場としての香港の重要性を踏まえ、香港においてファクタリングビジネスを行われるに際して留意 すべき香港の債権流動化に係る法制度についてご紹介します。
In many chapter 11 cases, creditors’ committees can play a vital role in maximizing the recoveries of unsecured creditors. But the powers of creditors’ committees are circumscribed by both the Bankruptcy Code and case law.
Introduction
In the recent case of Chau Cheok Wa v CT Environmental Group Ltd [2021] HKCFI 2602, the Court of First Instance (“Court”) reiterated that for appointment of provisional liquidators pending determination of a winding-up petition, an applicant must establish that there is a good prima facie case for winding-up order at the hearing of the petition and it is right that a provisional liquidator should be appointed in light of the circumstances of the case.
Background
It’s autumn and time to put that box-set viewing on pause and perhaps instead review the likely direction of travel of the “zombie” army of distressed businesses. How do you avoid contagion?
Unless you hibernated during the various lockdowns you will not have failed to notice that the impact of Brexit, the Covid-19 pandemic, and lockdown measures took their toll on spending, incomes and jobs, tipping the UK economy into recession after negative growth in the first two quarters of 2020.
Recent analysis by Begbies Traynor shows that more than half of UK businesses are carrying “toxic debt” that they might struggle to repay over the next 12 months. What if the company you are thinking of suing, or that is suing you, is one of them?
This week’s TGIF considers a recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Re Aviation 3030 Pty Ltd (in liq) [2021] FCA 1244 on section 477(2B) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) and approval of a liquidator’s proposal to enter into a settlement agreement with obligations that extend beyond three months.
Key Takeaways
This week, the Ninth Circuit explains the ins-and-outs of property abandonment under the Bankruptcy Code, and explores the government’s privilege to withhold the identity of informants in discovery.
On 20 October 2021, the Supreme Court of Appeal (“the SCA”) handed down a judgement in the matter of JP Markets v FSCA (Case no 460/2021) [2021] ZASCA 148 (20 October 2021) in terms of which the SCA set aside the decision of the High Court to place JP Markets (Pty) Ltd (“JP Markets”) into liquidation, finding that it was not just and equitable.