The Russian insolvency legislation mainly consists of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (the Civil Code) and the Federal Law No. 127-FZ on insolvency (bankruptcy) dated 26 October 2002 (the Insolvency Law), the principal legislation on insolvency in the Russian Federation.
As a result of major market changes, business entities more often suspend their operations and become insolvent, during which arises the question of the collectability of the claims of their creditors and associates, as well as persons who are in other relationships with such insolvent business entities.
The legislative framework governing bankruptcy provides partial answers. However, certain questions still remain unanswered in the shining shadow of legal gaps.
Draft new insolvency law for the UAE - is a big clean-up of delinquent debtors on the way?
It has been widely reported that the new insolvency law in the UAE is substantially progressed, with the UAE Federal Cabinet expected to review it in the early part of this year.
Saudi insolvency law has for some time been something of an unknown quantity for non-Saudis. A wide-ranging reform is due to take effect in 2016, which will express elements of the rescue culture and is likely to make restructurings more common. Increased certainty in the outcome of insolvencies will benefit both Saudi businesses and domestic and foreign creditors alike.
Since 14 August 2017 the Serbian Government’s proposal of new Amendments to the Insolvency Act („Amendments“) has been on the agenda of the National Parliament of Serbia. There is no information when the National Assembly will open the discussion and voting procedure on the Amendments. However, recent legislative practice in Serbia shows that Government’s bills rarely suffer material amendments during discussion and voting procedure in the Parliament. Below is a closer insight into the future legislative amendments to the Insolvency Act.
The legal instrument of reorganization plan is in practise often misued. For example, the plan is proposed just to to obtain a period of moratorium (in which the execution proceedings can not be run against the debtor), there are subsequent reorganization plans (so called „Chapter 22“) for the same debtor and plans are proposed even where there are no real economic grounds.
A new Enforcement Law has been introduced in Serbia, a significant portion of which will enter into force on 1 July 2016. One important novelty can be found in its Article 547, which, inter alia, introduces an obligation for certain enforcement creditors to deliver a specific statement to the court within a prescribed window of time, i.e. by 1 July 2016.
On 7 April 2020, the Singapore government passed a wide-ranging bill (the “Act”) providing temporary relief for parties who are unable to fulfil contractual obligations due to the Covid19 crisis.
The Act covers certain contractual obligations to be performed for the period 1 February 2020 to 1 August 2020 (both dates inclusive) (“Relief Period”).
This update sets out the legal implications for commercial litigation and insolvency matters.
A. COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
Re Zetta Jet Pte Ltd ([2019] SGHC 53) is a landmark decision by the Singapore High Court on the recognition of foreign bankruptcy proceedings and the public policy exception under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, as adopted by Singapore in the Tenth Schedule of the Companies Act (the Singapore Model Law).
This is the first reported decision in Singapore that:
A worldwide moratorium is one of the most important protections and tools available to a debtor in the Singapore cross-border restructuring regime. A recent Singapore High Court case, Re: Zetta Jet Pte Ltd and Others (Asia Aviation Holdings Pte Ltd, intervener) [2019] SGHC 53 ("Re Zetta Jet (2)"), highlighted some important considerations relating to such a worldwide moratorium, in particular dealing with potential conflicts between different jurisdictions.
Singapore's Cross-border Restructuring Regime