Highlights:

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court denied Thelma McCoy’s petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, passing up a golden opportunity to bring uniformity to the “important and recurring question” of how to determine the sort of “undue hardship” that qualifies a debtor for a discharge of student loans under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8).

In a recent High Court judgment, Judge Briggs considered the process to be followed where, in insolvency proceedings, a liquidator or administrator assigns a cause of action to another party under s246ZD of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the Act), and the assignee mistakenly brings an application under the Insolvency Rules 2016 (the Rules) when the claim should properly have been brought under Civil Procedure Rules.

Background

A recent decision of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court clarified the question whether a Swiss ancillary bankruptcy estate has standing to contest a schedule of claims of a bankrupt Swiss third-party debtor if the foreign bankruptcy estate filed the respective claims directly and regardless of the recognition of the foreign bankruptcy decree. In essence, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court denied the standing of the ancillary bankruptcy estate as it may in such cases not be considered a creditor of the respective claims.

It's probably becoming a cliché to say that the future is already here, but it's hard to resist. New technology increasingly pervades every professional sector, including that of insolvency.

In a recent report by the Law Society on developing technology, the Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Geoffrey Vos, commented that: "Lawyers face a steep learning curve. They will need to become familiar with […] cryptoassets – conceptually and functionally."

Sir Alastair Norris’ High Court judgment of 14 May 2021, confirming the sanctioning of the scheme of arrangement of DTEK Finance PLC in respect of existing bank lenders (the “Bank Scheme”) and the scheme of arrangement of DTEK Energy B.V. in respect of the outstanding notes (the “Note Scheme”) has now been published.

In a move largely welcomed by unsecured creditors, on 13 May 2021, the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong (CFA) handed down its judgment in Re Hsin Chong Construction Co. Ltd [2021] HKCFA 14 (the CFA Judgment), whereby disposition of a company’s residual rights and interests under a joint venture agreement after the commencement of its liquidation was held to be void.

Facts

Joint Venture

Important developments in insolvency law from Sun Electric Power Pte Limited v RCMA Asia Pte Ltd (formerly known as Tong Teik Pte Ltd) [2021] SGCA 60

Recently, in Sun Electric Power Pte Limited v RCMA Asia Pte Ltd (formerlyknown as Tong Teik Pte Ltd) [2021] SGCA 60, the Singapore Court of Appeal made several important clarifications about the law of insolvency in Singapore. In particular, the Court of Appeal clarified that:

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has held that in a Petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, only the debt and default need to be looked in to and that the value of the security would have no bearing on the legal requirement, which when satisfied would trigger the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

The Corporate defaulter had plead that assets mortgaged and or hypothecated to the financial creditor were of a very high value and hence, the dues were secured by the said assets.

On June 20, 2021, CP Holdings LLC and Pacrim U.S. LLC, holding companies for a portfolio of non-debtor subsidiaries which own and operate assisted living and memory care residences and offer third-party management services in the senior care space, filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-10950).