前言

2024年4月8日，世茂集团控股有限公司（股份代号00813.HK，“世茂集团”）在港交所披露，中国建设银行（亚洲）股份有限公司于2024年4月5日向香港特别行政区高等法院（“香港高等法院”）提出对世茂集团的清盘呈请，涉及金额15.795亿港元。世茂集团极力反对该呈请，提出将继续推进境外债务重组，并于4月10日发布有关清盘呈请的进一步公告称，高等法院已将该呈请的首次聆讯日定为2024年6月26日，呈请人提交清盘呈请并不代表能成功进行清盘。

而在2024年1月29日，香港高等法院对中国恒大集团（股份代号03333.HK，“中国恒大”）正式作出公司清盘令并委任共同及各别清盘人。2024年3月22日，中国恒大发布自愿性公告，称其已撤回向美国法院提出的境外债务重组协议安排申请。

继中国恒大陷入严重债务危机并被香港高等法院颁布清盘令后，世茂集团近期被债权人提出清盘呈请的事件再度引发内地债权人关注。对于内地债权人而言，香港清盘程序究竟会对其产生何种影响？

关于香港清盘程序以及清盘令的内容，以及香港清盘程序与内地破产程序的对比，详见我们在香港公司清盘程序对内地债权人的影响（一）一文中的分析。

Due Diligence by Voluntary Administrators in respect of their Appointment

Robust Construction Services Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1156 ("Robust")

Introduction

Keepwell deeds have been commonly used in financing arrangements entered into by business groups in Mainland China and foreign lenders because of the former limitation on repatriating proceeds raised overseas by Mainland companies, which had necessitated the use of foreign subsidiaries and a security structure.

Case: Darty Holdings SAS v Geoffrey Carton-Kelly (as additional liquidator of CGL Realisations Limited) [2023] EWCA Civ 1135

A Hong Kong court has refused to sanction a scheme of arrangement, saying that practitioners should explain the key terms and effect of any proposed restructuring in a way which can be easily understood by the creditors and the court.

In Re Sino Oiland Gas Holdings Ltd [2024] HKCFI 1135, the Honourable Madam Justice Linda Chan refused to sanction a scheme of arrangement, saying that creditors had been given insufficient information about the restructuring and the scheme that would enable them to make an informed decision at the scheme meeting.

Phoenix Tech Ltd had carried on business to defraud HMRC by participating in a kind of VAT fraud sometimes called “missing trader intra-community” fraud or “carousel” fraud. It had submitted a VAT return claiming the right to deduct VAT and a repayment in respect of various transactions in the sum of £4.5 million. HMRC denied the input tax claim in relation to the transactions and issued a misdeclaration penalty for £607,387. The company appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber).

1. Is a letter of support from your immediate holding company sufficient to satisfy the solvency test?

In Re a Company [2024] EWHC 1070 (Ch) was an application to restrain presentation of a petition on five grounds:

(1) that the judgment debt was time-barred; (2) that it was unclear if there had been an acknowledgment of the debt within the limitation period; (3) that there was a substantial dispute as to whether the judgment debt had been satisfied; (4) that the company was solvent; and (5) whether it was appropriate to grant an injunction.

In a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (In the matter of Pacific Plumbing Group Pty Limited (in liquidation) [2024] NSWSC 525), Justice Black determined that a payment made by a third party was not an unfair preference because the payment did not diminish assets available to creditors.

Key Takeaways

On 31 August 2022, the Cayman Islands restructuring officer regime came into force.[1] The regime was introduced to provide increased flexibility to implement a restructuring of Cayman Islands insolvent companies, including by providing the breathing space of an automatic moratorium that operates from the date of presentation of the restructuring petition.