As the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands reopens for 2024, we reflect on 2023 and some of the large-scale cross-border insolvency and restructuring proceedings, and complex commercial disputes dealt with in the jurisdiction over the past year.
Statistics from the Grand Court
There were approximately 1,579 filings made in the Grand Court, which can be broken down as follows:
The last 12 months have seen a steady increase in restructuring and stressed or distressed financing transactions in the European market across a range of sectors, including tech, real estate, hospitality, manufacturing and retail.
“Bankruptcy provides a valuable and desirable venue for the resolution of [mass tort] disputes” by:
一，问题的提出 随着近年来供给侧结构性改革以及优化营商环境指标相关措施的推进，企业破 产案件数量逐年增加。以上海破产法庭为例，2020 年全年立案受理破产、公司 强制清算、衍生诉讼等各类案件共计 1567 件，同比增长 32.7%；2021 年全年立 案受理同类案件共计 2381 件，同比增长 51.9%；2022 年全年立案受理同类案件 共计 3412 件，同比增长 43.3%。 但是仅就重整程序而言，上海破产法庭 2020 年共计办结重整成功案件 4 件，盘 活企业资产总价值 14.66 亿元，普通债权平均清偿率 57.5%[1]；2021 年共计办 结重整成功案件 13 件，盘活企业资产总价值 75.6 亿元，普通债权平均清偿率 10.4%[2]；2022 年盘活企业资产 11.3 亿元，普通债权平均清偿率 4.9%[3]。 可以看出，近年来破产案件受案数量呈现爆发性增长的态势，但是重整成功的 案件数量增长率相较于整体破产案件的涨幅来讲并没有显著增加，同时盘活资 产总价值也存在波动，而评判一个重整案件法律效果和社会效果最直观的指标 “普通债权清偿率”呈现出断崖式下降，降幅高达 91.48%。
Subsequent to the High Court’s decision inGalapagos Bidco S.à r.l. v Dr Frank Kebekus [2023] WHC 13931 (Ch) (for more on which see our commentary), the High Court dismissed yet another claim brought by a junior creditor in the context of a senior creditor enforcement.
A perfect storm of rising costs, labour shortages and high interest rates is resulting in an increasing amount of financial distress in the construction sector. What warning signs should lenders look out for? What are the implications under the loan agreement and how can lenders mitigate the risks of insolvent contractors?
Introduction
Looking back at 2023, one of the more memorable judicial decisions emanating from Jersey was the decision of the Court of Appeal in HWA 555 Owners, LLC v Redox PLC S.A. and Thieltgen [2023] JCA 085. In this update we explore how this decision might impact upon the creditors’ winding-up regime provided for in the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.
HWA 555 Owners, LLC v Redox PLC S.A. and Thieltgen
Introduction
导语 近年来，我国营商环境明显改善，党中央、国务院高度重视深化“放管服”改 革，优化营商环境工作，就进一步优化营商环境、更好服务市场主体，规划 性、持续地发布有关实施意见。各地政府部门也在此基础上，依据当地经济发 展情况和市场主体经营现状，制定符合当地经济发展的有关规定，推进对营商 环境的优化和改善。而在营商环境优化的各项举措中，对出现债务危机的企业 加强实施自救，引入政府部门扶持和司法机构指导等，无疑是对企业恢复正常 经营强有力的支持措施。 出现债务危机的企业，有些可能会通过破产程序来解决企业的债务问题。企业 破产制度和流程在整个法律法规体系内非常的专业且独立，破产企业、企业债 权人以及其它利害关系人在参与企业破产过程中通常会碰到很多专业法律问 题，需要专业团队的支持和引导。近几年来，伴随着法律制度的完善，对企业 破产可采取的措施，逐渐有法院开始接纳“预重整”制度，并应用在实际的破 产案件中。什么是预重整？预重整与破产重整有何区别？预重整制度存在的价 值如何？预重整制度在目前的应用情况如何？笔者将在本文中就这些疑问整 理、讨论，以飨读者。 一，预重整制度的提出 预重整制度并非一个新话题，2018 年最高人民法院印发的《全国法院破产审判 工作会议纪要》中就已经提出“探索推行庭外重组与庭内重整制度的衔接。
Bankruptcy Considerations for Unitranche Transactions with Super-Priority Revolvers without an AAL