11 U.S.C. § 1191(c)(2) provides (emphasis added):

• “(c) . . . the condition that a plan be fair and equitable . . . includes . . . (2) . . . all of the projected disposable income of the debtor to be received in the 3-year period, or such longer period not to exceed 5 years as the court may fix, . . . will be applied to make payments under the plan.”

There is little-to-no guidance in the Bankruptcy Code on what “as the court may fix” might mean. So, that meaning is left to the courts to decide.

The recent Privy Council decision in Sian Participation Corp (In Liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd[2024] (SPC) has overturned a principle of English law relating to the interaction between a contractual agreement to arbitrate and traditional insolvency measures where a debt is said to be disputed without substantial grounds.

A recent chambers decision holding that gross overriding royalties (“GOR”) can be vested off in a reverse vesting order (“RVO”) is on its way up to the Court of Appeal of Alberta (the “ABCA”). The ABCA has granted leave to appeal Invico Diversified Income Limited Partnership v NewGrange Energy Inc, 2024 ABKB 214 (“Invico”).

The Chambers Decision

The Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd & Anr. v. Vijaykumar V. Iyer & Ors. (Civil Appeals nos. 3088-89 of 2020) clarified the law on permissibility of set-off of claims under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("The Code") at the stage of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ("CIRP") when the Resolution Professional ("RP") proceeds under Section 25 (2)(a) of the Code.

Actions brought against the BHS directors by the group’s liquidators have resulted in the largest reported award for wrongful trading since the provision’s introduction, but the judgment highlights some unsettled areas of the law relating to directors’ duties.

This week’s TGIF considers a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Forex Capital Trading Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Invesus Group Limited [2024] NSWSC 867). Justice Ball determined that admission of a proof of debt by a liquidator was not akin to a judgment or settlement, and that such an admission did not create a new liability of the company.

Despite three recent landmark UK restructuring plan decisions, uncertainty remains around the value, if any, a plan company should offer dissenting creditors as the “deliverability price” of a plan.

Weil's Appellate & Strategic Counseling group welcomes you to Weil's SCOTUS Term Review. Here, we summarize and analyze the cases from the 2023 Supreme Court Term that are most germane to our clients' businesses.

In most bankruptcies, the company decides to file for relief. In involuntary bankruptcies, creditors force the company into bankruptcy. Involuntary petitions are an extreme remedy, and therefore the requirements and standards to meet for filing such petitions are strictly construed and applied. If creditors meet the requirements under the Bankruptcy Code for filing an involuntary petition, it can serve as a powerful tool to use against a debtor.

Key Issues

本稿では、近年のシンガポールの事業再生/倒産に関連する法・実務の発展を概観しつつ、シンガポール国際商事裁判所(以下｢SICC｣といいます。)における国際事業再生/倒産案件の取扱いについて解説します 。

1. 近年のシンガポール事業再生/倒産に関連する法・実務の発展

シンガポールは、様々なビジネス分野において東南アジア(又はグローバル)におけるハブを指向していますが(例えば、国際仲裁の分野において、シンガポール国際仲裁センター(SIAC)は国際仲裁機関として高い評価を得ています。)、事業再生/倒産の分野も例外ではありません。以下の年表からも分かるとおり、2010年代以降、政府・金融機関・実務家等が一丸となって、①グローバルスタンダードに合致し、かつ、国際倒産への対応も可能な倒産法制度を整備しつつ  、②シンガポールの裁判所を、東南アジアにおける国際事業再生/倒産案件のフォーラムとして確立しようとする動きが顕著に見られます 。