We have published a series of articles dealing with directors’ duties in the zone of insolvency.
On April 3, 2024, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (comprised of Federal Courts in Alabama, Florida and Georgia), affirmed the decision of the District Court for the Middle District of Florida in Al Zawawi v. Diss (In re Al Zawawi). The Court held that eligibility requirements for a “debtor” contained in section 109(a) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to foreign recognition proceedings under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code.
On 17 April 2024 the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (theUKJT), chaired by Sir Geoffrey Vos published its Legal Statement on Digital Assets and English Insolvency Law.
Our prediction
With New Zealand’s economy in recession, we predict an increase in insolvency-related disputes and litigation over next 12-months.
Why?
A variety of factors combine to give rise to the expected uptick in insolvency-related claims:
1. Introducción
En la edición de este mes de abril destacamos la ya famosa sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Valencia del 27 de marzo que declara la ineficacia total del plan de restructuración de Das Photonic, S.L.
Sobre esta sentencia se ha hablado mucho porque es la primera declaración de ineficacia de un plan de restructuración.
La sentencia tiene casi 150 páginas pero reseñamos abajo los puntos clave de su contenido que hemos extractado porque creemos pueden servir de lección para casos futuros.
Introduction
When the restructuring officer regime was introduced, it was assumed by many that joint provisional liquidators would no longer be appointed for restructuring purposes, having been overtaken by the new regime. The recent decision of Re Kingkey Financial International (Holdings) Ltd suggests that this assumption may not be sound. It also raises several interesting points regarding the restructuring officer regime that merit further consideration. This article considers the Kingkey case, and the points arising from it
In my most recent blog post, I provided some tips for creditors who find themselves in the Subchapter V arena. This is somewhat of a follow-up to that one.
ICC Judge Mullen’s judgment in Sriram v Revenue & Customs & Anor [2024] EWHC 853 (Ch) follows an application by the bankrupt, Ms Sriram, to annul a bankruptcy order made against her on a petition of HMRC in circumstances in which proper service of both the statutory demand and the petition was contested and in which her capacity to understand the proceedings against her was also in issue.
Under sections 90-15 and 90–20 of Schedule 2 of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) (Practice Schedule) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act), a liquidator may apply to the court for directions and judicial advice in winding up.
Purpose of Judicial Advice
The purpose of judicial advice was to give the liquidator advice as to the proper course of action to take in the liquidation, as noted by Goldberg J in Re Ansett Australia Ltd and Korda [2002] FCA 90 (Ansett).