Industry insights
Following two significant insolvency decisions in the High Court of Australia (Bryant v Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd and Metal Manufactures Pty Limited v Morton), insolvency professionals and creditors have had to reassess the value and requirements of proof in unfair preference claim recoveries.
On 30 November the Supreme Court delivered its written judgment dealing with the correct test for insolvency when considering the eligibility of a debtor for a Personal Insolvency Arrangement (PIA) under the Personal Insolvency Act 2012 (as amended).
Background
One of the qualifying criteria for a PIA is that the debtor must demonstrate that the debtor is “insolvent” within the meaning of section 2(1) of the Personal Insolvency Act 2012. That provision defines the term as meaning “that the debtor is unable to pay his or her debts in full as they fall due”.
This article will look at the recent decision of David Doyle J in In the Matter of HQP Corporation Limited (in Official Liquidation) (7 July 2023) and its effect on the ability of investors to recover damages from a company in which they have acquired shares as a result of a fraudulent misrepresentation.
Introduction
The case involved an application by liquidators for direction in relation to three issues in the winding up of the Company:
1. INTRODUCTION
On 9 November 2023, a three-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court comprising of the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, while disposing off over 350 writ petitions, in Dilip B. Jiwarajka v. Union of India and Ors. 1 , upheld the constitutional validity of several key provisions [Section 95 to Section 100] of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) pertaining to the insolvency resolution process for individuals and partnership firms.
On December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal of Poonian v British Columbia Securities Commission, 2022 B
Our review of 2023 brings you right up-to-date with the latest developments in restructuring and insolvency law in Hong Kong and the mainland.
2023 saw mixed messages for holders of offshore bonds issued by Chinese issuers hoping to enforce on the mainland, good news for lenders benefitting from “hybrid” jurisdiction clauses and a degree of uncertainty being seen in the Hong Kong courts as to whether an agreement to arbitrate should always take precedence over a winding up petition, particularly where cross-claims are involved.
Abigal Boura v Lyhfl decision
1. The High Court considered whether one director has standing to apply to court for the appointment of an administrator in circumstances where there is no majority of the board and no valid resolution of the board in favour of the application. Abigal Boura v Lyhfl Limited [2023] EWHC 2585 (Ch)(19 October 2023).
Analysis
Over the decade since the implementation of the costs reforms proposed in Lord Jackson's Review of Civil Litigation Costs, lawyers and litigants have become accustomed to the courts actively managing the costs of disputes with a value up to £10 million. But the court also retains a discretion to apply the costs management regime in cases even above this level.
As the nights draw in and the new year approaches, we take stock of the state of play for European restructuring and look ahead at potential trends for 2024.
Completion of legal reforms
On Thursday 9 November, Macfarlanes hosted a webinar which focused on the role of directors and in particular navigating those stresses and strains placed upon them in the uncertainties of the current markets.
The webinar was given by an expert panel comprising of finance partner and head of Macfarlanes’ restructuring and insolvency group, Jat Bains, finance partner and qualified insolvency practitioner, Paul Keddie, and litigation partner, Lois Horne.
The panel discussed the following three principal themes.