Doing Business in Russia 2015 Doing Business in Russia 2015 Baker & McKenzie - CIS, Limited Moscow Office White Gardens, 10th Floor 9 Lesnaya Street Moscow 125047, Russia Telephone: +7 495 787 27 00 Fax: +7 495 787 27 01 [email protected] St. Petersburg Office BolloevCenter, 2nd Floor 4A Grivtsova Lane St.
COVID-19 has had impacts on contracts relating to commercial undertakings (e.g., construction projects), commercial and industrial tenancies, and individual consumer transactions (e.g. bookings for events). Individuals or companies who are unable to meet their obligations may have to pay damages or forfeit deposits. Otherwise stable businesses may be sued and face lengthy litigation or possible insolvency.
CLIENT UPDATE 2016 FEBRUARY 1 © Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Key Legislative and Regulatory Developments in Singapore for the Year 2015 This Update provides a brief summary of the key statutory and regulatory developments in Singapore for the year 2015.
Alvin Yeo SC and Melvin Lum acted for the Second Intervener, Thomas Chan, in his claim for $3,275,935.81 as interest for the late completion of the sale of a property ("Property").
This table provides an overview of the key developments in 2012 to date.
Since gaining its independence in 1993, the Slovak Republic has adopted new laws at a rapid pace. As a country in transition, its legal system continues to develop.
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Swart v Starbuck & Others 2016 ZASCA 83, reaffirmed the necessary authorisation for a trustee of an insolvent estate to sell an insolvent estate’s immovable property.
Mr Swart’s estate was finally sequestrated on 1 November 2005. On 24 January 2006, three provisional trustees were appointed by the Master of the High Court. At the time of Mr Swart’s provisional sequestration, he owned certain immovable properties (Properties).
The case of Kythera Court v Le Rendez-Vous Café CC trading as Newscafé Bedfordview case number 2016/11853 GLDJ reiterated the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) decision in Cloete Murray NO & another v Firstrand Bank Ltd T/A Wesbank 2015 (3) SA 438 (SCA) that an agreement can be cancelled during business rescue as the unilateral act of cancellation does not constitute enforcement action in terms of s133(1) of the Companies Act, No 71 of 2008 ( Act).
In two recent cases decided in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), namely,Willow Waters Homeowners Association (Pty) Limited v KOKA NO and others [2015] JOL 32760 (SCA) and Cowin NO v Kyalami Estate Homeowners Association (499/2013) [2014] ZASCA 221, the SCA was asked to consider:
In recent years it appears to have become a common trend for distressed homeowners to publish voluntary surrender notices as a stratagem to stay execution proceedings instituted by creditors. We have also witnessed an increase in institutions approaching distressed homeowners following publication of a notice of sale in execution, purporting to be in the business of assisting distressed homeowners by guarding their homes from sales in execution by the sheriffs of the high courts.