June 2025 – The current economic situation is causing an increasing number of lessees to have concerns about the financial situation of their lessors and the stability of their lease rights. In this context, the question often arises as to what effect (i) the opening of insolvency proceedings against a lessor's assets, and/or (ii) the (compulsory) sale of the property on which the leased premises are located have on the lease agreement.  

1.  Opening of insolvency proceedings against the assets of a lessor

The Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”) recently handed down judgment in Prinsloo v Majiedt N.O. and Another, addressing the protection of benefits of long-term life insurance policies under section 63 of the Long-term Insurance Act, 1998 (“LTIA”). The case specifically considered these protections in the context of marriage in community of property and the subsequent sequestration of the joint estate.

In a significant decision with far-reaching consequences for the financial and insolvency ecosystem, the Kerala High Court (“High Court”) in J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala adjudicated upon the levy of stamp duty on assignment agreements executed under Section 5 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act”).

Introduction

An amalgamation or reconstruction of companies under sections 366 and 370 of the Companies Act 2016 ("CA 2016") is a common tool for corporate restructuring in Malaysia. It enables the seamless transfer of assets and liabilities from the transferor to the transferee, typically within group structures where both companies share a common ultimate holding company.

The Supreme Court of India’s (“Supreme Court”) decision in the case of Kalyani Transco vs M/s Bhushan Steel and Power Limited1 and connected appeals raises some serious legal issues. We understand from the public domain that parties are considering filing review and curative petitions. Without expressing any views on the judgement, set out below is a summary of the key findings and directions of the Supreme Court.

Switzerland is known for its efficient legal system and pro-enforcement stance. However, if you are a foreign insolvency practitioner handling bankruptcy proceedings with ongoing litigation in Switzerland, you may face some procedural hurdles.

This article outlines the effects of a foreign bankruptcy decree in Switzerland and explores the available options to initiate or continue litigation.

WHAT HAPPENS?

Foreign insolvency practitioners are barred from litigating without prior recognition

Introduction

Under Brazilian law, the concept of objective arbitrability, as established by the Arbitration Law (Law No. 9,307/1996), refers to disputes involving rights of a patrimonial nature, provided that such rights are freely disposable by the parties involved.

A recent amendment to the Brazilian Bankruptcy Law (Law No. 11,105/2005) established that the commencement of judicial reorganization proceedings by a distressed company does not entail the inability to submit disputes to arbitration.

Kingsley Napley is pleased to report the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith DBE in the case of Re MPB Developments Ltd [2025], which represents an excellent result for our client.

We act for the petitioners in long running litigation. Two years ago, our clients presented a creditors’ winding up petition, together with a contributory’s winding up petition on the just and equitable basis and an unfair prejudice petition.

Introduction

On 20 May 2025, Mr Justice Marcus Smith handed down his eagerly-awaited judgment sanctioning the two inter-conditional restructuring plans (the Plans) proposed by members of the Petrofac Group. The judgment raises issues described as “going to the heart of the Part 26A regime” and is significant as the first case to consider the application of the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Thames Water.

The judgment addresses three particularly interesting points:

In a recent judgment, the Belgian Court of Cassation ruled that a secured creditor must renew the registration of its mortgage even after the opening of bankruptcy proceedings. Aside from its obvious significance for real estate security, the Court’s ruling may have wider implications for secured creditors and could potentially be interpreted to apply to other forms of security, including the registered movable assets pledge. Secured creditors should see this as a reminder to ensure that perfection requirements continue to be met, be it before or after insolvency.