The insolvency moratorium the government put in place in 2020 kept insolvency numbers low. Once this was lifted on 1 January 2021, we all expected a wave of insolvencies, however, the various business support packages and lack of pressure from banks and the Australian Tax Office (ATO) gave businesses breathing room.
A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India (SC) in V. Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. & Others (judgment dated 22 October 2021 in Civil Appeal No. 3327 of 2020) dismissed an appeal against an order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) which had dismissed an appeal against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal Chennai (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) as barred by limitation.
Facts
INTRODUCTION
今回のニュースレターでは、2021 年 10 月の破産倒産法関連の主なアップデートについて取り扱ってい ます。最高裁判所(=SC)、会社法上訴審判所(=NCLAT)、会社法審判所(=NCLT)の各裁判所に おいて下された重要な判決についてまとめる共に、2016 年破産倒産法の改正についても解説しています。
1) GOVERNMENT AMENDS THE RULES RELATING TO INSOLVENCY OF CORPORATE DEBTOR TO ENSURE TIME BOUND INSOLVENCY PROCESS.
Notification dated: 30 September 2021.
The full written judgment of Sir Alastair Norris in respect of the sanction of the Part 26A restructuring plan for Amicus Finance PLC (in administration) was belatedly handed down last week. As we reported in August (linked here), Amicus is the first company in administration to implement a Part 26A restructuring plan, which was fiercely contested by one of the creditors of the Group, Crowdstacker.
(Promontoria (Oak) Ltd v Emanuel; Emanuel v Promontoria (Oak) Ltd; Promontoria (Henrico) Ltd v Samra; Promontoria (Chestnut) Ltd v Simpson & Anor; Bibby Invoice Discounting Ltd v Thompson Facilities and Project Management Services Ltd & Anor)
Introduction
This morning, the Court of Appeal has handed down landmark guidance on how far a defendant in litigation can look under the bonnet of their pursuer's commercial transactional documents and check out the mechanical parts of a deal to which the defendant is not party.
In two recent judgments, the Hong Kong companies court has set out the principles applicable to winding up companies holding operating subsidiaries in the mainland through intermediate subsidiaries incorporated offshore, most commonly in the BVI. In doing so, the Honourable Mr. Justice Harris highlighted the need for the petitioner to demonstrate a "real and discernible benefit" to creditors, something which will be challenging to prove if the company’s centre of main interests is not in Hong Kong.
This year’s 1 Chancery Lane Autumn Bumper Briefing takes as its theme – what else? – Covid-19 and its consequences. Some two years after the virus was first identified, and just over eighteen months since the first lockdown began, the courts are starting to deal with cases arising out of the pandemic and the measures taken to contain it.
This week’s TGIF considers In the matter of Habibi Waverton (in liquidation) (administrator appointed) [2021] NSWSC 1443, a recent decision of the Supreme Court of NSW in which the Court opted to use its general powers to allow a voluntary administrator to transfer shares without the owner’s consent to implement a DOCA.
Key Takeaways
In the matter of 1A Eden Pty Limited [2021] NSWSC 82 the Court considered whether a disagreement between directors was solemn enough to wind up the company.
P, a director, applied to wind up a company that was the trustee of a unit trust.
P’s fellow directors were S and D. P said there was a deadlock and relations between them had broken down.
P and S were builders. D was a property developer. The 3 agreed to found the Co to develop a site together with P and S to share 50% of the profits and D to take the remaining half as unit holders.
On August 5, 2021, the Eighth Circuit reversed a district court’s decision to dismiss a confirmation order appeal as equitably moot.[1] The doctrine of equitable mootness can require dismissal of an appeal of a bankruptcy court decision – typically, an order confirming a chapter 11 plan – on equitable grounds when third parties have engaged in significant irreversible transactions