In the world of international trade, insolvency with cross-border elements is inevitable. Unlike many jurisdictions, there is no statutory mechanism in Hong Kong to deal with cross-border insolvency, and the Court's recent conflicting decisions added greater confusion as to Hong Kong's approach.
Key Points
A binding contract by exchange of email did not arise where parties were simply exploring a potential deal.
Sale by auction is often appropriate where an asset is difficult to value.
Where no differential treatment of creditors, unfair harm requires that a decision does not withstand logical analysis.
The Facts
Hong Kong courts recently recognised reorganisation proceedings in Mainland China for the first time in Re HNA Group Co Limited [2021] HKCFI 2897, further enhancing the cooperation between Mainland China and Hong Kong in cross-border insolvency matters.
The facts
Dutch football club ADO Den Haag has filed for WHOA proceedings after its major shareholder failed to pay €2 million due to the club, leaving it unable to meet its financial obligations.
The decision
Sky Building Ltd (the Company) owned a development property (the Property) and granted leases for 145 flats. Leasehold contracts were exchanged in relation to 143 flats, giving rise to purchasers' liens. Some of the purchasers' liens (securing liabilities of approximately £6.5 million) were protected by registration of notices against the title to the Property, conferring a priority interest in the event of a sale of the Property.
Under section 64 of the German Companies Act (GmbHG), the managing director of a company is obliged to reimburse payments which have been made after the company becomes illiquid or over-indebted but not when the payments are made with the diligence of a prudent businessman. Such permitted payments include those that are necessary for production, internal operation, and the maintenance of the business concern.
Background
According to German law, managing directors of limited liability companies are personally liable for payments that have been made despite insolvency. This can lead to widespread liability.
Key Points
Insurers had no priority rights to collect premiums over the proceeds of a successful action they had insured, as a result of a drafting error.
The High Court affirmed the general rule that, where a party has contracted for an unsecured right only, the court will not elevate it to a secured status.
The Facts
Background
Voting rights in Austrian restructuring proceedings (which require the approval of more than half the creditors holding more than half of the company's debt) are often contested, as the company's assets are liquidated if the creditors vote against the proposed restructuring or debt cut.
Secured creditors may only participate in the vote with the unsecured part of their claim and must file an application for the right to vote. It was unclear whether such an application for a voting right for a specific amount could subsequently be changed.
Background
The crisis exit treatment procedure has been introduced to provide a temporary judicial procedure for debtors encountering difficulties related to the pandemic and the financing of their activities. This excludes debtors that are structurally in distress.
The procedure enables debtors to adopt a repayment plan within a three-month period to resolve the company's financial difficulties. The procedure is subject to the rules governing judicial reorganisation proceedings with certain adaptations and exclusions.