During bankruptcy proceedings, much like in corporate insolvency, there is always the concern that the debtor will dispose or transfer away his property so as to keep it out of reach of his creditors.
Introduction
An unfair preference transaction will only be voided under the Companies Act if it is influenced by a desire to prefer the receiving party in the event of insolvency, and not if it is motivated by proper commercial considerations. In Tam Chee Chong and another v DBS Bank Ltd [2010] SGHC 331, the Singapore High Court had the opportunity to consider what constitutes proper commercial considerations.
A winding up application may be resisted by reason of a cross-claim against the petitioning creditor.
"Subject to contract" clauses are often used in commercial transactions to indicate that an agreement is incomplete until the terms of a formal contract have been settled
In Econ Piling Ltd v Sambo E&C Pte Ltd [2010] SGHC 120, the Singapore High Court rejected the proposition that where a debtor is released from its debts, its other joint-debtors are also automatically released.
The case of Noerwest Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Newport Mining Ltd [2010] SGHC144 involved the sale of the shares of a company which owned phosphate mining and production fascilities in the Sichuan province.
2010 saw many important legal developments in the area of business finance & insolvency law both internationally as well as in Singapore.
When a company enters financial difficulty, it faces conflicting interests. On the one hand, it must continue with commercial transactions to preserve and hopefully rehabilitate the company; on the other, it must respect its creditors’ rights by not making payments which may be seen as preferring certain creditors.
The case of Norwest Holdings Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Newport Mining Ltd [2010] SGHC 144 involved
the sale of the shares of a company which owned phosphate mining and production facilities in the
Sichuan province.
InEcon Piling Pte Ltd v Sambo E&C Pte Ltd [2010] SGHC 120, the Singapore High Court rejected the proposition that where a debtor is released from its debt, its other joint-debtors are also automatically released.