Without a doubt, a scheme of arrangement is a preferred corporate rescue mechanism for a company in financial distress. It allows the management of a company to retain control while carrying out an approved debt restructuring compromise or arrangement with creditors of the company. The ultimate goal is to restructure the debts of the company in a manner acceptable to at least 75% of its creditors in value so that the company can continue as a going concern.
An intention to transfer is not sufficient to claim lost property
The Channel Islands of Guernsey and Jersey did not introduce emergency insolvency legislation as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and do not presently have measures equivalent to those found in the UK’s Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act, 2020 (“CIGA”).
1 | 6 Critique on the Standing Committee Report on Implementation of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Pitfalls and Solutions The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance for the year 2020-2021 (Standing Committee) has published the 32nd Report on Implementation of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Pitfalls and Solutions (Report) on 29 July 2021. The Report includes various observations and recommendations of the Standing Committee with respect to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) and the insolvency resolution regime in India.
On September 10, 2021, Agspring Mississippi Region LLC, along with four affiliates, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Lead Case No. 21-11238). Agspring Mississippi Region and its affiliates are each subsidiaries of non-debtor Agspring LLC, an agriculture supply chain services company.
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (Coronavirus) (Amendment of Schedule 10 Regulations 2021) (the “Regulations”) will modify CIGA by extending certain restrictions on the use of winding up petitions, albeit on a more limited basis, in line with the tapering of government support measures introduced to combat the economic impact of COVID-19.
Antitrust team leader Edoardo Cazzato joins the firm with team
Insolvency proceedings are typically launched by an administrator or liquidator during an insolvency process. The nature of modern insolvency litigation, including the market for assigning causes of action to third parties, has somewhat muddied the waters on how and where to commence proceedings. Two recent cases provide some valuable insight into the High Court’s approach.
On September 8, 2021, A.B.C. Carpet Co., Inc., dba ABC Carpet & Home, along with two affiliates, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Lead Case No. 21-11591). ABC Carpet & Home is a New York City-based luxury furniture retailer. The company estimates $10 to $50 million in assets and $50 to $100 million in liabilities.
In a relationship between a creditor and debtor, the issue of liability is always a cause of concern. This is made even more apparent when there is more than one debtor involved as the terms of liability is not necessarily clear. Among the popular issues of contention is whether the debtors’ liability is joint or joint and several. In this commentary, we will explore this artificial distinction through the recent Federal Court case of Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja v. Edwin Cassian Nagappan @ Marie [2021] 1 LNS 928.