This article examines the emerging trend of U.S.-based companies with Canadian ties initiating primary insolvency proceedings in Canada and seeking recognition in the United States under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. As described herein, this two-step strategy enables debtors to take advantage of the flexibility and efficiency of Canadian restructuring regimes, while securing key U.S. bankruptcy protections.
A Strategic Shift in Cross-Border Insolvency
A. Introduction
In the recent judgment, Re Jingrui Holdings Ltd [2026] HKCFI 246, Harris J made a winding-up order against an unregistered foreign company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, of which the assets are located in Mainland China.
In this Judgment, the Court confirmed the following principles: -
(1) The Court will wind-up a foreign company only if doing so has a real possibility of benefitting the creditors. The Court will assess such benefit in a practical and commercial way.
Primul de acest fel în piață, studiul poartă semnătura echipei de litigii Filip & Company, subcoordonarea avocaților Alin Grapă și Eduard Maxim. Inaugurăm astfel o serie anuală pe care ovom continua consecvent ca reper constant pentru acest subiect.În cadrul materialului sunt analizate date statistice obținute prin consultarea platformelor publiceîn legătură cu sistemul judiciar din România, fiind centrat pe materia litigiilor civile, comerciale șia celor de contencios administrativ.
The High Court of Ireland has in a recent case recognised and enforced the terms of an individual voluntary arrangement (“IVA”) under the law of Northern Ireland.
1. What is insolvency?
Insolvency is defined in section 95A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)(Act) as the inability of a company to pay its debts when they fall due. Australian law applies a cash-flow test rather than a balance-sheet test, meaning the inquiry does not turn on the numerical gap between assets and liabilities.
The English High Court has again been called upon to consider the validity and legal impact of dealings conducted via WhatsApp.
Background
The Court of Appeal has handed down its judgment in DG Resources Ltd v The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, a decision that clarifies how winding‑up petitions must be served, an issue with implications for the 30,000 UK businesses using the Companies House default address for receiving official mail.
Background
DG Resources Ltd owed HMRC £1.104 million.
On 11 December 2024 HMRC presented DG Resources with a winding-up petition.
The petition came before Chief ICC Judge Briggs, who made several key findings:
The Supreme Court of New South Wales has provided guidance as to the meaning of “true employer” for the purposes of the external administration provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act) in In the matter of Mosaic Brands Limited (administrators appointed) (receivers and managers appointed) [2025] NSWSC 959. The decision is important for liquidators and receivers of large corporate group where there are individual trading and employing entities and funds have been recovered from circulating assets.
Here’s a judicial estoppel hypothetical:
- debtor files Subchapter V bankruptcy and achieves a confirmed plan;
- in the bankruptcy debtor fails to disclose a pre-petition lawsuit claim;
- after plan confirmation, debtor files suit on the pre-petition lawsuit claim; and
- defendant seeks dismissal of the lawsuit, with prejudice, on grounds of judicial estoppel—i.e., for debtor/plaintiff’s failure to disclose the claim in bankruptcy.
Question: Who should be the ultimate beneficiary of a lawsuit claim that debtor fails to disclose:
On January 26, 2026, the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta (ABKB) held that the Alberta Department of Energy and Minerals (Alberta Energy) is required to first advance its claim for royalty arrears owed by an insolvent energy company within ongoing restructuring proceedings of that insolvent company, before seeking recovery from jointly liable solvent co-lessees.