Kingsley Napley is pleased to report the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith DBE in the case of Re MPB Developments Ltd [2025], which represents an excellent result for our client.

We act for the petitioners in long running litigation. Two years ago, our clients presented a creditors’ winding up petition, together with a contributory’s winding up petition on the just and equitable basis and an unfair prejudice petition.

Introduction

On 20 May 2025, Mr Justice Marcus Smith handed down his eagerly-awaited judgment sanctioning the two inter-conditional restructuring plans (the Plans) proposed by members of the Petrofac Group. The judgment raises issues described as “going to the heart of the Part 26A regime” and is significant as the first case to consider the application of the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Thames Water.

The judgment addresses three particularly interesting points:

In a recent judgment, the Belgian Court of Cassation ruled that a secured creditor must renew the registration of its mortgage even after the opening of bankruptcy proceedings. Aside from its obvious significance for real estate security, the Court’s ruling may have wider implications for secured creditors and could potentially be interpreted to apply to other forms of security, including the registered movable assets pledge. Secured creditors should see this as a reminder to ensure that perfection requirements continue to be met, be it before or after insolvency.

The Supreme Court has handed down a decision in Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) and othersv Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2025] UKSC 18, which clarifies the parties who ar

In Re Chow Kai Weng (A Debtor) [2025] HKCFI 1888, the Court dismissed the Debtor’s interim order application.

Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA) is an alternative to bankruptcy – it involves an application to the Court for an Interim Order. The debtor is required to make a repayment proposal to the creditors which, on approval, is binding on all creditors. However, contrary to the widely-held belief that interim order applications appear to be non-contentious in nature, time and again the Court of Appeal has reminded practitioners that:

In a recent decision, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has clarified equitable subordination risks in connection with shareholder loans. The key takeaways are as follows:

On 2 May 2025, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in respect of the corporate insolvency resolution process of Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (“BSPL”). In a very significant ruling, the apex court rejected the resolution plan of JSW Steel Ltd. (“JSW”) for BSPL and directed the liquidation of the corporate debtor, almost five years after the plan had been approved by the Committee of Creditors and the NCLT and the Resolution Plan had been implemented.

Facts and Background

On 7 May 2025, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) handed down a judgment providing useful guidance on the meaning of “fraudulent trading” within s.213 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (Insolvency Act) and how the test in s.32(1) of the Limitation Act 1980 (Limitation Act) operates, in Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) v Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2025] UKSC 18 (Bilta). In this article, we give a brief summary of the facts, issues and rulings in the judgment and its practical implications for Hong Kong’s corporate insolvency regime.

Background

Introduction

• The Fifth Circuit's December 2024 decision in Serta Simmons Bedding invalidated an uptier transaction in which certain lenders provided new money financing and exchanged existing debt for new super-priority debt.
• The Fifth Circuit criticized the doctrine of equitable mootness, rejecting the argument that the doctrine barred the court's review of the bankruptcy court's plan confirmation order because the plan had already been substantially consummated and relied upon by third parties.
• The Fifth Circuit's refusal to apply the doctrine of equitable mootness is not