In September 2010, the Determinations Panel of the Regulator (the "DP") issued financial support directions ("FSDs") against six companies in the Lehman Brothers Group, but determined that no FSDs would be issued against 38 other companies in the group. The trustees of the Lehman Brothers Pension Scheme appealed the decision not to issue FSDs against these 38 companies to the Upper Tribunal. However, the companies applied for the trustees' appeal to be struck out.

Commercial Dispute Resolution Jakarta Client Alert September 2015 Supreme Court Ruling on Bankruptcy of Bumi Asih Jaya On 9 September 2015, the Republic of Indonesia Supreme Court gave its ruling on the cassation application submitted by the Financial Services Authority ("OJK") regarding the bankruptcy petition against PT Asuransi Jiwa Bumi Asih Jaya ("BAJ"), one of the oldest insurance company in Indonesia. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of OJK and approved the bankruptcy petition against BAJ. Under the previous regime, Law No.

A recent decision of the NSW Court of Appeal demonstrates the importance for security trustees tocarefully consider and understand their obligations in an enforcement scenario.

Need to know

Dispute Resolution Singapore Client Alert July 2015 Singapore High Court determines proprietary interests of customers of insolvent brokerage firm, MF Global Singapore Pte Ltd In the latest instalment arising out of the insolvency of MF Global, the Singapore High Court had to decide whether certain customers of the insolvent brokerage firm had any proprietary interests in the assets of the firm, and whether these assets were held on trust for these customers.

In Akagi v. Synergy Group (2000) Inc. (“Akagi“), the Ontario Court of Appeal set aside a series of ex parte orders made by Toronto’s Commercial List Court granting broad investigative powers to a court-appointed receiver.

Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Arcapita, Bank. B.S.C. v. Bahr. Islamic Bank, No. 15-cv-03828 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2016) [click for opinion]

Update on Dutch partnerships Willemijn Punt The Dutch Supreme Court recently delivered two important and interesting judgments in the matter of partnerships. The first judgment relates to the consequences of bankruptcy of a general partnership or a limited partnership for its partners. The second judgment pertains to a matter that has kept opinions in case law and legal literature divided for a long time, namely whether or not an acceding partner is liable for debts of the partnership going back to a moment in time prior to his or her accession.

Liquidators of insolvent Australian companies often pursue directors of the failed company in recovery proceedings for the benefit of creditors. Following a High Court of Australia decision in April 2016, it is now clear that the liquidators can join liability insurers of defendant directors in such proceedings, even when the insurer has denied liability under a policy.  The liquidators, even though not a party to the contract, may then seek a declaration in the same proceedings that the insurer is liable to indemnify the insured defendant.

Increased vigilance required in actions for recovery: a "yes, but" does not constitute acceptance

In the presence of a retention of title clause where collective insolvency proceedings are initiated against a debtor, the creditor must file a request for the recovery of goods sold under the retention of title clause before the judicial administrator within three months from the date the opening judgment is published in the Bodacc (Official Bulletin of Civil and Commercial announcements).

Conducting Business in Ukraine 2016 Conducting Business in Ukraine 2016 Conducting Business in Ukraine 2016 Baker & McKenzie Renaissance Business Center 24 Bulvarno-Kudriavska (Vorovskoho) St.