On 1 January 2021, new Dutch restructuring law Wet Homologatie Onderhands Akkoord (or WHOA) came into effect. Here, we run through what WHOA is and cover the first decisions handed down under the new law.

What is WHOA?

引言\

香港法例第 485 章《強制性公積金計劃條例》規定，僱員及僱主均須在強制性公積金計劃 （「強積金」）作出強制性供款，違例的僱主即屬犯罪，而強制性公積金計劃管理局（「積金 局」）可提出法律程序追討強制性供款。最近在 Re Hsin Chong Construction Co Ltd [2020] HKCFI 3160 一案中，法院探討了公司在清盤開始後支付的尚欠強制性強積金供款，是否可獲 法院認可。 

背景

經營建築服務的新昌營造廠有限公司（「該公司」）正在進行清盤。2018 年 2 月起，該公司 偶然未能為其僱員作出強制性強積金供款。積金局對該公司提出民事訴訟，並在該公司沒有抗 辯下就四項申索取得勝訴，可討回 2018 年 3 至 9 月的未付強積金供款合共港幣 958 萬元。

After Virgin Atlantic and Pizza Express achieved ‘too much consent’ and did not need cross-class cram down in the end, DeepOcean is the first judgment applying cross-class cram down as part of a restructuring plan.

In Uralkali v Rowley and another [2020] EWHC 3442 (Ch) – a UK High Court case relating to the administration of a Formula 1 racing team – an unsuccessful bidder for the company's business and assets sued the administrators, arguing that the bid process had been negligently misrepresented and conducted.

The court found that the administrators did not owe a duty of care to the disappointed bidder. It rejected the claimant's criticisms of the company’s sale process and determined that the administrators had conducted it "fairly and properly" and were not, in fact, negligent.

The real lesson from Debut Homes – don't stiff the tax (wo)man

The Supreme Court has overturned the 2019 Court of Appeal decision Cooper v Debut Homes Limited (in liquidation) [2019] NZCA 39 and restored the orders made by the earlier High Court decision, reminding directors that the broad duties under the Companies Act require consideration of the interests of all creditors, and not just a select group. This is the first time New Zealand’s highest court has considered sections 131, 135 and 136 of the Companies Act, making this a significant decision.

引言

香港法例第 485 章《强制性公积金计划条例》规定，雇员及雇主均须在强制性公积金计划 （「强积金」）作出强制性供款，违例的雇主即属犯罪，而强制性公积金计划管理局（「积金 局」）可提出法律程序追讨强制性供款。最近在 Re Hsin Chong Construction Co Ltd [2020] HKCFI 3160 一案中，法院探讨了公司在清盘开始后支付的尚欠强制性强积金供款，是否可获 法院认可。 

背景

经营建筑服务的新昌营造厂有限公司（「该公司」）正在进行清盘。2018 年 2 月起，该公司 偶然未能为其雇员作出强制性强积金供款。积金局对该公司提出民事诉讼，并在该公司没有抗 辩下就四项申索取得胜诉，可讨回 2018 年 3 至 9 月的未付强积金供款合共港币 958 万元。

Part 2: Amendments Affecting Mortgage Lenders and Landlords

As discussed in a previous post, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (the “Act”), which was enacted on December 27, 2020 in response to the economic distress caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, amended numerous provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. This post discusses amendments specifically affecting landlords.

Introduction

While there has been much fuss over the recent ruling by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in In re Nine West LBO Securities Litigation¹ due to its potential ramifications for director liability, as we explored in Part I of our series on this case here, court watchers have paid less attention to the court’s treatment of officer liability and the interes

A recent decision of the Court has confirmed that the recipient of funds from an individual who is subject to a bankruptcy petition can be construed as having provided value where that value is given to a third party (and not to the bankrupt personally).

Roger Elford and Jessica Williams in the Corporate Restructuring and Insolvency team at Charles Russell Speechlys LLP acted for a successful Respondent, Howard de Walden Estates Limited, in these proceedings.

The Background