The Financial Services Authority (OJK) has issued the first regulation on the dissolution, liquidation and bankruptcy of insurance companies. On 11 December 2015, enacted Regulation No. 28/POJK.05/2015 on Dissolution, Liquidation and Bankruptcy of Insurance Companies, Syariah Insurance Companies, Reinsurance Companies and Syariah Reinsurance Companies (POJK 28). Before the enactment of  POJK 28 there was no regulation within the vicinity of the insurance law on matter.

On December 11 2015 the Indonesian Financial Services Authority (OJK) enacted Regulation 28/POJK.05/2015 concerning the Dissolution, Liquidation and Bankruptcy of Insurance Companies, Sharia Insurance Companies, Reinsurance Companies and Sharia Reinsurance Companies. The regulation was authorised by Articles 42(4), 44(3), 45(3) and 51(4) of Law 40/2014 concerning Insurance, which require the aforementioned processes to be governed by a specific regulation.

The Supreme Court has again urged the legislature to consider whether the outright prohibition on professional litigation funding and the assignment of bare causes of action continues to be warranted as the ever-increasing cost of litigation is putting access to the courts beyond the reach of many.

While the Court accepted that this is an area in need of careful and considered legislative reform, it warned that unless a real effort is made by the legislature to improve access to justice, it will have "no option" but to step in, "undesirable and all as unregulated change might be."

In the matter of Mouldpro International Limited (In Liquidation) and in the matter of The Companies Acts 1963 – 2005 the Court of Appeal reduced the fees of the liquidator in respect of three of the four periods of the six-year liquidation of Mouldpro International Limited ("Mouldpro"), finding that the hours claimed for were "neither reasonable nor necessary".

Introduction

If a transaction by a company amounts to an "unlawful distribution", and the company subsequently goes into liquidation, will an action for recovery of the benefits of that distribution, brought against the directors who authorised the transaction, be statute-barred if it is commenced by the liquidator of the company more than 6 years after the distribution was made?

Introduction

The Companies (Accounting) Act 2017 (the ‘Act’) provides welcome clarity on the position of crystallised floating charge holders in relation to their priority over preferential creditors.

The Irish High Court has recently ruled on the test for determining whether the transfer of a debt is a "true sale" or is by way of a charge. It has, helpfully, adopted the well-established test taken in a long line of English cases which emphasises that the legal form of the contract adopted by the parties will determine its nature, provided the contract is not a "sham".

In a recent judgment the Irish High Court for the first time confirmed as “good law” in Ireland the approach taken by the English courts to the circumstances in which a transaction, documented as a sale of receivables, may be re-characterised as a secured loan. Invoice discounting, factoring and similar receivables financing products are important sources of working capital finance for SMEs and are increasingly a funding tool offered by alternative lenders.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Ireland (“MIBI”) is not liable to meet the cost of claims against former policyholders of the now defunct Setanta Insurance Company Limited (“Setanta”).

The judgment has far reaching implications for Irish motor insurers and policyholders.

Setanta, a Maltese registered insurance company which also operated in Ireland, went into liquidation on 30th April 2014 leaving an estimated 1,666 uninsured claims against Irish policyholders valued at around €93 million.