RESTRUCTURING - COURT PROCEDURES
Formal, court-driven restructuring proceedings are available into Luxembourg law, but for practical reasons, these are rarely used in practice.
Reprieve from payment procedure (sursis de paiement)
Usual Luxembourg security package
Luxembourg is one of the leading domiciles worldwide for international investment portfolio acquisition vehicles.
Acquisition financing are usually secured against the assets and cash flows of the target company as well as of the buyout vehicle.
In practice, given that a Luxembourg holding company generally does not have any operational activities, shares, receivables and cash on bank are the most important assets to cover.
Introduction
Luxembourg’s sophisticated financial services infrastructure, global brand recognition, full EU single market access and extensive double tax treaty network has lead to its development as a core jurisdiction for non-regulated investment structures. This has resulted in the domiciling of several tens of thousands of investment holding companies, many of which form part of globally recognised corporate groups or hold the portfolio investments of leading international investment funds.
RUBIN V EUROFINANCE SA
New Cap Re v Grant
[2012] UKSC 46
The recent decision of the English High Court in the case of Fry v Sherry [2012] (In the matter of Ruscoe Ltd (In Liquidation)) serves as a timely reminder of the potential personal liabilities faced by directors should they breach their fiduciary duties.
Summary of the facts
In the current economic climate, there has been increased interest from clients and their advisers in using offshore companies in cross-border restructurings. The use of offshore companies in restructurings is often driven by tax and structuring advice, where there is a desire to continue the group operating as a going concern and to achieve a favourable outcome for creditors (usually outside of formal insolvency proceedings).
Such companies can offer a number of advantages when used as part of a restructuring plan, including:
Key Issues
The transaction documents (eg ISDA, GMRA or prime brokerage agreements) for derivatives transactions (or other transactions involving netting provisions) are usually governed by English law or New York law. However, there are a number of local law issues which our clients should consider when proposing to enter into such transactions with offshore counterparties, including the following key issues:
Two recent decisions of the UK courts concern UK liquidation and administration of foreign companies
Refusal to Wind-Up Foreign Companies: Re Buccament Bay Limited [2014] EWHC 3130 (Ch)
The High Court of England and Wales may refuse to exercise its discretion to wind up companies incorporated abroad where there would be little likelihood of the petitioners deriving benefit from the winding-up.
The Privy Council has handed down judgment in the claim brought by the liquidators of Fairfield Sentry Limited ("Fairfield") against a number of redeemed investors, seeking to recover the amounts paid out to them on redemption.
The anticipated rise in UK and European corporate insolvencies over the next two years should be prompting both borrowers and lenders to take early advice where they have concerns about businesses' solvency outlook, says Ogier offshore restructuring specialist Simon Felton.
Simon, a partner in Ogier's Banking & Finance team was involved in several post financial crisis restructurings, including the receivables trustee of a £13.5bn portfolio of UK RMBS as well as portfolios of loans in the Irish banking industry and regulatory capital in the Austrian banking sector.