In this edition of the Going concerns, our Stephenson Harwood restructuring and insolvency team provides a brief update on the newest developments in Singapore, UK and Hong Kong. For Singapore, we update on the "conflict" between the admiralty and insolvency regimes while our London team provides an update on the cutting-edge Part 26A restructuring plans. Last but certainly not least, our Hong Kong team dissects and discusses the significance and impact of the new cooperation mechanism for Hong Kong liquidators and Mainland administrators to seek mutual recognition and assistance.
The motivation for the recent insolvency law reforms is to give insolvent companies breathing space to try to reorganise their affairs and allow viable businesses to continue to trade
With the threat of increased insolvencies as an effect of the COVID-19 pandemic remaining very real, the construction sector needs to be aware of the impact of changes to insolvency laws.
Changes to insolvency laws in the UK, Australia and Singapore may affect how parties deal with the termination of construction contracts where one party to the agreement is insolvent.
This article looks at some recent developments in the bankruptcy and insolvency laws in Singapore and Malaysia.
Singapore: Dispositions of property
Under the Singapore bankruptcy law, any disposition of property made by a bankrupt since the day of making the application for the bankruptcy order is void unless the court consents to, or ratifies, the disposition. This rule is enshrined in section 328 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, 2018 (the IRDA).
Against the backdrop of the covid-19 pandemic and soon-to-be-rescinded government support schemes, local principal Emmanuel Chua and associate Shriram Jayakumar at Baker & McKenzie Wong & Leow in Singapore discuss three key trends to look for in the “new normal”
In brief
Against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic and soon-to-be-rescinded government support schemes, local principal Emmanuel Chua and associate Shriram Jayakumar at Baker & McKenzie Wong & Leow in Singapore discuss three key trends to look for in the "new normal."
Contents
Introduction
In Sun Electric Power Pte Ltd v RCMA Asia Pte Ltd [2021] SGCA 60, the Singapore Court of Appeal had the opportunity to consider some vital questions relating to insolvency proceedings. In the context of an appeal against a winding-up order, the Court considered whether the company's directors should be entitled to control the appeal, and who should be responsible for the costs of the appeal.
In Sun Electric Power Pte Ltd v RCMA Pte Ltd (formerly known as Tong Teik Pte Ltd) [2021] SGCA 60 (“Sun Electric”), the Singapore Court of Appeal (per Justice Judith Prakash) addressed in its written ground of decision (“GD”) the questions of: (i) what is the applicable test for the purpose of determining insolvency under s 254(2)(c) of the Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) (“Companies Act”); and (ii) who should be the appropriate party to control the conduct of the appeal, as well as to bear the responsibility of any costs incurred during and after the appeal, following a company’s right
Important developments in insolvency law from Sun Electric Power Pte Limited v RCMA Asia Pte Ltd (formerly known as Tong Teik Pte Ltd) [2021] SGCA 60
Recently, in Sun Electric Power Pte Limited v RCMA Asia Pte Ltd (formerlyknown as Tong Teik Pte Ltd) [2021] SGCA 60, the Singapore Court of Appeal made several important clarifications about the law of insolvency in Singapore. In particular, the Court of Appeal clarified that:
- Victims of fraud often face an uphill battle in seeking restitution for their loss.
Introduction
Under Singapore bankruptcy law, when a person is adjudged bankrupt, any disposition of property made by him from the date of the bankruptcy application is void unless the court consents to or ratifies the disposition. However, will the court ratify the disposition of assets made pursuant to an order for division of assets in divorce proceedings, and in what circumstances will it do so? These were the issues considered in the Singapore High Court case of Ong Dan Tze Magdalene v Chee Yoh Chuang & Anor [2021] SGHC 129.