Hong Kong's highest court has considered for the second time in recent years the conduct of examinations under section 221 of the Companies Ordinance. That section enables (amongst other things) a court to compel any persons whom it believes may have information concerning the affairs or dealings of a company in liquidation to be examined in private under oath.

Anglo Starlite Insurance Co. Ltd. (the "Company") was placed into provisional liquidation on 8 May 2009 following an investigation by the Hong Kong Insurance Authority ("IA"). Peter Whalley and Jan Blaauw of PricewaterhouseCoopers were appointed as joint and several provisional liquidators.

The SFC has applied to the High Court for an order directing Lehman Brothers Asia Ltd to comply with a SFC notice to produce certain records in connection with its investigation of the offer and marketing of Minibonds. The SFC notice required Lehman Brothers to produce to the SFC all documents relating to the assessment of Minibonds by an internal Lehman Brothers committee. Lawyers for Lehman Brothers objected to the production of certain documents on the ground that such documents were the subject of a claim of legal professional privilege.

Hong Kong's highest court has recently considered the extent of the court's sweeping jurisdiction under section 221 of the Companies Ordinance, which enables it (amongst other things) to compel companies in liquidation to produce documents and for individuals to be examined on oath. The case will be welcomed by liquidators given that the court unanimously confirmed that it has jurisdiction to make such orders under this "extraordinary" section.

Section 221 of the Companies Ordinance and its predecessor sections have been with us for a very long time – its origins can be traced back to the Companies Ordinance 1865. It has been described as a vital part of the statutory insolvency regime, and there are corresponding provisions in the UK, Australia, Singapore, Canada and New Zealand. Because section 221 and its overseas equivalents have been around for so long, there is a wealth of authority on its scope and purpose.

But first, a reminder of the Court’s powers under section 221. These are:

The main aim of the revision of the Hungarian Bankruptcy Law, effective September 2009, was to make the bankruptcy proceeding more attractive for creditors as well as debtors, to make clearing debt in the course of a bankrutpcy proceeding more effective and, with the increasing number of bankruptcy agreements, to decrease the number of liquidators.  

Changes to Hungarian bankruptcy law mean that priority will be given to creditors who pledge property as security or collateral. Minor changes to Hungarian corporate legislation require companies to list specific court registration information on their official correspondence and websites.

Introduction

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (‘IBBI’) was established under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘Code’). On 31st March 2017, IBBI in exercise of its powers under the said Code notified the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Voluntary Liquidation) Regulations, 2017 (‘Regulation’). It came into force with effect from 1st April 2017. The Regulation provides for a complete framework for the voluntary liquidation of any corporate person.

Background

Background