Welcome to the 2023 edition of "From Red to Black", our annual review of significant developments and topical issues in the Australian restructuring and insolvency market.

On Sunday, March 12th, the Treasury Department, the FDIC, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Fed) (the Agencies) announced that the New York Department of Financial Services had appointed the FDIC as receiver for Signature Bank, which was closed on March 11th.  Subsequently, the FDIC announced that it had transferred substantially all of the assets and all of the deposits of Signature Bank to the newly created Signature Bridge Bank, N.A.  Early on March 13th, the FDIC announced a similar transfer of assets and deposits to Silicon Valley Bank, N.A., another n

Once a tenant becomes insolvent a landlord's recovery options become more limited but there are important steps a landlord should be taking.

1. Check the terms of any rent deposit agreement

Check the terms of the arrangement to find out how the deposit is held and when it is available for to use. In some cases, such as when a tenant has entered into a creditors' voluntary agreement, consent from the court may be required before the deposit can be used.

2. Find out the tenant's status

IR Global’s insolvency members showcase their expertise on how cryptocurrency is treated as an asset in a bankruptcy proceeding in their jurisdiction, what legal tools can be used against exchanges to recover stolen cryptocurrency and how can the filing of a Chapter 15 proceeding be used in connection with a cryptocurrency exchange that is the subject of a foreign insolvency proceeding.

IanLambert Partner / Litigation & Insolvency, Broadhurst LLC

Introduction

When a company enters financial trouble, the Singapore restructuring and insolvency framework provides a number of avenues through which the rights of the company's creditors may be addressed. Amongst these avenues, receivers may be appointed pursuant to an instrument to enforce a secured creditor's rights. Judicial managers may also be appointed by the Court to manage the business and assets of the company.

Introduction The new meme, increasingly used to describe the current state of the economy, is a “rolling recession,” rather than the hard or soft landing many commentators expected. In other words, we are experiencing mild slumps rippling through the economy that have the potential to slow inflation without radically impacting the labour market.

A range of issues are thrown up in a work accident claim where either the claimant or defendant becomes insolvent. Less common, but it does come up in work accident claims is the insolvency of the claimant employee either before the claim is issued, during the claim or after judgment/ settlement and some implications on certain procedures and orders such as PPO. More commonly faced issues are the insolvency of the employer as an individual or a company and often in occupational illness claims a long dissolved company.

In Kennedy Civil Contracting Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) v Richard Crookes Constructing Pty Ltd v Richard Crookes Construction Pty Ltd; In the matter of Kennedy Civil Contracting Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 99, the NSW Supreme Court considered whether a company on the brink of liquidation can take action to enforce a payment claim under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (SOP Act).

One concept—“center of main interests,” or COMI for short, one of the more significant elements borrowed from international law and incorporated into Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code—sits at the heart of the latter, enacted in 2005 as the latest U.S. legislative attempt to handle cross-border insolvencies and international restructurings.

In spite of this notion’s importance, however, bankruptcy and appellate federal courts have long divided over a thresholder issue: as of which date should a foreign debtor’s COMI be determined?

Introduction:

On 5 October 2022, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgement in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022]. The decision is the first from the Supreme Court to address when, and in what circumstances, company directors owe a duty to consider the interests of the company’s creditors (‘’the creditor duty’’).