The long-standing uncertainty about the availability of statutory set-off to unfair preference claims has finally been determined by the High Court. The Court in Metal Manufactures Pty Ltd v Morton unanimously found that section 553C set-off is not available to creditors that are found to have received an unfair preference.
The decision provides much need certainty to liquidators and creditors alike.
The Case
In a recent per curium opinion, the Fifth Circuit recommitted to its practice of dismissing claims against court-appointed fiduciaries when plaintiffs fail to obtain permission before bringing suit. The court rested its decision on the Barton doctrine, which other courts, including the Eleventh Circuit, have found inapplicable in similar circumstances.
A recent U.S. bankruptcy court opinion out of the Central District of California may have cracked the door open for companies formerly tied to the cannabis industry to pursue legal strategies using bankruptcy. Federal prohibitions on cannabis have complicated the industry’s entitlement to legal protections, including chapter 11 bankruptcy. Judge Neil W.
Relief under ss 423-425 Insolvency Act 1986 is not limited to cases of insolvency, as the decision of David Edwards KC, sitting as a High Court judge in the Commercial Court, in Integral Petroleum SA v Petrogat FZE & Ors ([2023] EWHC 44 (Comm)) demonstrates.
简介
英国和香港的法例均规定,债权人只可以就其应获支付的算定金额提出破产呈请,但相关法例条文并无界定何谓「算定金额」(liquidated sum)。在Re Dusoruth (a bankrupt) Dusoruth v Orca Finance UK Ltd (in liquidation) [2022] EWHC 2346 (Ch) 一案中,英格兰及威尔斯商业及财产法庭(「法院」)澄清,复还不当得利的申索不论如何确切,仍不能被视为算定金额,因此不能成为破产呈请的依据。
背景
申请人是一名商人,亦是在英国、英属维尔京群岛及马尔他等多个司法管辖区注册的多间公司的最终拥有人。他以其中一家公司进行欺诈,游说富户投资,然后透过无抵押贷款将资金转移到他控制的其他公司。申请人被他其中一间正在清盘的公司(「答辩人」)基于以下债务提出破产呈请(「该破产呈请」),并于2020年11月被判定破产:
1.从答辩人的银行帐户支付,用于清偿申请人的个人信用卡帐单的361,899.73欧元;及
The Federal Court of Australia (Court) has handed down the first reported decision on the ipso facto stay provisions contained in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act).
What is now known as the ‘ipso facto regime’ was introduced by the Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Enterprise Incentives No. 2) Act 2017 in September 2017, which inserted a number of provisions that provided for a stay on the exercise of certain ipso facto contractual rights in the context of corporate restructuring and insolvency procedures.
What is an ipso facto clause?
BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA & Others [2022] UKSC 25
Factual Background
1. In December 2008 and May 2009, the directors of a UK limited company, known as Arjo Wiggins Appleton Limited (“AWA”) distributed dividends to its parent company and sole shareholder, the defendant in the claim, Sequana SA (“Sequana”). The dividend payment in May 2009 was just over £119m.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that bankruptcy filers cannot avoid debt incurred by another’s fraud.
The 9-0 ruling, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, unanimously rejected Kate Bartenwerfer's bid to use U.S. bankruptcy code protection to eliminate debts on the grounds that she was unaware of fraudulent omissions made by her husband.
In the tenth edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood’s restructuring and insolvency team covers the innovative attempt by a distressed company to shut out low-valued creditors in a scheme of arrangement, the utility of the Singapore recognition of foreign insolvencies regime to assist international liquidations, and the factors which the Singapore Courts will consider when deciding whether to stay a bankruptcy application. It has been a pleasure preparing these articles over the past five years and a big thank you to our readers!
Content