Introduction  

The success of a scheme of arrangement in restructuring depends largely on the consent of the requisite statutory majority of the scheme creditors. To incentivise the creditors to commit to the proposal at an early stage, scheme companies may seek to enter into a lock-up agreement with the creditor, in which the creditor provides an undertaking to vote in favour of the scheme in exchange for certain benefits, such as consent fees.

Introduction

In this case, Re Kobian Pte Ltd (OS 1269 / 2020 in the Singapore High Court), Kobian Pte Ltd applied to the Singapore High Court for a moratorium to propose a scheme of arrangement with its creditors. The legal issues at stake were the necessary conditions to be fulfilled by an Applicant in order to obtain a moratorium under section 64 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 (IRDA).

Singapore is getting serious about becoming the region’s international insolvency hub. In this inaugural podcast from the International Insolvency Institute, Hon. Kevin Carey (Ret.) of Hogan Lovells discusses Hon. Christopher S. Sontchi‘s forthcoming move from Delaware bankruptcy judge to International Judge of the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC).

In the latest edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood's restructuring and insolvency team touches on the extent of the automatic stay arising from the recognition of a foreign main proceeding under the Singapore Model Law cross-border recognition regime, the requirements for a pre-pack scheme of arrangement under the recent Singapore Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018, and the importance of Environmental, Social and Governance ("ESG") in the restructuring context.

Contents

Introduction  

Debtor's bankruptcy applications may be seen as being less common than creditors' bankruptcy applications. The law regarding the conduct of debtor's bankruptcy applications, including the relevant tests and the burden of proof, is thus less often explored. In Re Then Feng [2022] SGHCR 1, the Singapore High Court provided guidance in this regard.

The Shipping Law Updates is a publication by our Regional Shipping Group which marshals legal expertise, industry insight, and commercial acumen in the fields of maritime and trade from the diverse talent pool of specialist lawyers at the Rajah & Tann Asia offices. The publication provides a snapshot of the key legal, regulatory, case law and industry developments in the region that have an impact on the shipping industry and your operations.    

Restructuring a Multinational Corporation to Optimize Profitability and Efficiency A Case Study By Owen D. Kurtin Kurtin PLLC, New York, NY 2022 Revised Edition T:212.554.3373|E: [email protected] | W:kurtinlaw.com 2 The TO Project A few years ago, I was asked to serve as lead outside legal counsel to a U.S.-basedpublic corporationinanindustrialbusiness sector withoperations in over thirty countries in the reorganization of its global corporate structure and operations.

Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. Supreme Court: Once the resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors and submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, a successful resolution applicant cannot withdraw or modify the resolution plan The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has held in its judgment dated September 13, 2021, in the matter of Ebix Singapore Private Limited v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another (Civil Appeal No.

Introduction

Commercial transactions and disputes are increasingly likely to contain a cross-border element. As such, the ability of Courts to cooperate on the management of proceedings that span their respective jurisdictions will facilitate the efficient resolution of cross-border issues. In this regard, the Singapore and Malaysia Courts have demonstrated a commitment to judicial cooperation between the two countries.

In Australia, s 436A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) provides for the circumstances in which a company may appoint a voluntary administrator. This provision requires the company’s board to resolve that: (a) in the opinion of the directors voting for the resolution, the company is insolvent, or is likely to become insolvent at some future time; and (b) an administrator of the company should be appointed.