The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) was enacted to enable corporate insolvency resolution of financially stressed corporate debtors in a time bound manner, so as to maximise the value of their assets. The decision to rehabilitate or liquidate a corporate debtor lies with the committee of creditors (Committee), comprising the corporate debtor’s financial creditors. The Code allows the Committee sufficient freedom and flexibility to explore, negotiate and, subsequently, choose the most suitable option for the corporate debtor.

The case in question is CIMB Bank Bhd v. World Fuel Services (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2021] SGCA 19. The decision was delivered on 5 March 2021 by the Singapore Court of Appeal.

The judgment addresses issues surrounding claims by a bank under assignments and other security documents over rights in and receivables under commodities supply contracts, and overturns the Singapore High Court decision in CIMB Bank Bhd v. World Fuel Services (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2020] SGHC 117.

Summary

Some interesting recent scheme and plan law of late, proving that schemes and plans continue to be popular restructuring tools for all types of companies and international groups.

DeepOcean companies (Part 26A plans) – January 2021

This was the first time that the court had to consider the application of the new ‘cross-class cram down’ procedure under Part 26A. Trower J approved the plans proposed by three DeepOcean companies but had reserved judgment and in late January handed down a written judgment with important guidance for future plans.

Key Contacts:

It is well known in the restructuring world that a debtor in bankruptcy can’t get a PPP loan. But what if you’re a debtor and decide a PPP loan could save your business? Will a court dismiss the case so you can seek a loan?

On 22 October 2020, the UAE government made various changes to the UAE Bankruptcy Law*, including the concept of Emergency Financial Crisis (EFC). Subsequently, on 10 January 2021, the UAE Cabinet declared the existence of an EFC in the UAE. In this article, Partners Michael Morris and Keith Hutchison explore how this declaration may impact on debtors and creditors.

Emergency Financial Crisis

One of the key changes implemented was a power given to the UAE Cabinet to declare an EFC. An EFC is defined as:

SUMMARY

Introduction

In January 2021, Law 14.112/20 introduced a new section into the Brazilian Bankruptcy Law (the "BBL") regulating financing for companies which are the subject of a court-supervised reorganisation.

In a recent decision, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York upheld a bankruptcy court order that enjoined a plaintiff holding an asbestos claim from pursuing a state court products liability claim against the successor to Manville Forest Products Corporate (“MFP”). Notably, the Court reaffirmed that a claim relating to prepetition exposure to asbestos is a prepetition claim, even though the injury may not have manifested itself until after the petition date.

簡介

在最近 Re Lerthai Group Ltd [2021] HKCFI 207 一案中，原訟法庭澄清了法院在行使酌情權押 後清盤呈請以便公司能夠進行債務重組時會考慮的因素。法院裁定，公司不但須證明在重組後 能夠向要求立即還款的債權人償還債務，而且須證明它將會繼續經營盈利的業務，或至少在中 期內能夠支付其到期債務。

背景

2017 年 9 月 29 日，中國工商銀行（亞洲）有限公司（「工銀亞洲」）與勒泰商業有限公司 （「勒泰」）訂立了一份融資協議，融資金額為 1.5 億港元。根據協議規定，香港聯合交易所 有限公司主板上市的勒泰集團有限公司（「該公司」）須就此承擔共同及各別責任。由於勒泰 及該公司拖欠還款，工銀亞洲入稟追討泰勒超過 1.7 億港元的債務（「該債務」），並於 2020 年 5 月 19 日獲判勝訴。

2020 年 7 月 2 日，工銀亞洲就該債務對該公司發出法定要求償債書。其後，該公司被提出清 盤呈請（「該呈請」）。該公司申請押後該呈請以便進行債務重組，而由於該公司的債務總額 接近 40 億港元，工銀亞洲請求法院立即頒下清盤令，因為其認為押後該呈請是徒勞無功的。 其他獲發通知就該呈請出庭的債權人並沒有出席聆訊。