The recent decision by the Hong Kong Courts in Re Ando Credit Ltd [2020] HKCFI 2775 represents a step in the right direction in judicial cooperation over cross-border insolvency between Hong Kong and the Mainland.

A crucial aspect in cross-border insolvency proceedings is the mutual recognition of the winding-up order and execution of the same to allow liquidators to reach assets in other jurisdictions in satisfaction of the Company’s debts.

In a first, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in the Arcapita Bank case had to decide whether Shari’a compliant investment agreements, providing for Murabaha and Wakala transactions, qualify for the safe harbor protections provided in the bankruptcy code for securities contracts, forwards and swaps. The court held that they do not. Since the opinion runs about 100 pages long, we attempt to distill some very basic facts concerning Shari’a compliant transactions and point to important holdings made by the court.

Shari’a Compliant Transactions

On 23 March 2021, the 2011 sale of the One Blackfriars development site in London by administrators was cleared of misfeasance by the High Court, in Re One Blackfriars Ltd [2021] EWHC 684 (Ch).

In a £250 million claim, the company's liquidators had alleged that the former administrators had breached their duties by failing to act independently of the banking syndicate which appointed them, failing to properly assess the value of the site, and selling the site at an undervalue.

Here, we recap the facts of the case and outline the key takeaways to consider.

The debtor violated numerous state court orders in actions to recover amounts he misappropriated. The state court held him in contempt and imposed monetary sanctions and ordered him to stop managing property he did not own and to turnover proceeds from the illegal management. The debtor filed his bankruptcy petition the day before a state court hearing on sentencing the debtor to jail for contempt.

Dear Clients and Friends,

In 2020, domestic and international energy markets were challenged by a worldwide pandemic and its effect on commodity prices, which accelerated disruptions in supply chains and impacted the energy transition in countries around the world.

New act overning attachments and executions

In Re Octaviar Ltd,^[1] the Supreme Court of Queensland has given a recent example of a settlement considered too ‘good’ to approve, even while noting its failure to achieve perfection.

Intellectual property (IP) is a valuable asset in any liquidation or bankruptcy. However, it presents unique legal and practical challenges for insolvency practitioners.

These challenges include:

Background

In a recent High Court decision, it was ruled that the liquidator not only failed in his application before the court, but in bringing forward an application that was 'doomed to fail', the liquidator was acting negligently and breached his duty of care to the company as liquidator. As a result, the liquidator was held personally liable for the costs of the application.

In Nederland is het, vergeleken met omringende landen, vrij eenvoudig om beslag te leggen. De Wet herziening beslag- en executierecht (de ‘Wet’) beoogt het beslag- en executierecht voor schuldeisers eenvoudiger te maken door de mogelijkheden tot digitaal beslag leggen te verruimen. Ook wordt het beslag- en executierecht efficiënter met als gevolg dat schuldeisers minder kosten hoeven te maken om vorderingen te incasseren. Enig tegenwicht biedt de Wet, uitgebreider dan voorheen, door waarborging van het bestaansminimum van natuurlijke personen met schulden.