The latest edition of our bulletin, edited by our colleagues in Australia.
Welcome to the first edition of our Commodities bulletin for 2022.
On 18 October 2021, the EU Commission published the sixth amendment to its Temporary Framework for State aid measures to support the economy in the COVID-19 outbreak (the Temporary Framework) adopted on 19 March 2020 (see our blog post).
海航集团有限公司（于中国内地重整） [2021] HKCFI 2897（裁决日期：2021 年 9 月 16 日）
前言
海航集团有限公司（一家总部设在海南的大型企业，下称“公司”）的内地重整程序最近在香港获得认可。这是香港法院首次向 内地重整程序的破产管理人颁发认可令的案例。
In the groundbreaking recent decision in Re Samson Paper Company Limited (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) [2021] HKCFI 2151 (“Samson”), the Hong Kong Companies Court (the “Hong Kong court”) has for the first time issued a letter of request to a court in mainland China under the new cross-border mutual recognition, assistance and cooperation arrangement between Hong Kong and mainland China (the “Mainland”) in relation to corporate insolvency and restructuring matters (the “Cooperation Arrangement”), which took effect on May 14, 2021.
The European Commission decided on 5 July 2021 to open an in-depth investigation into the restructuring plan of the airline TAROM notified by Romania in May 2021, as well as into the EUR 190 million aid to support it under the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring undertakings in difficulty.
The Romanian airline TAROM has been in financial difficulties for many years. In February 2020, the Commission approved rescue aid of EUR 36.7 million in favour of the airline in the context of a Romanian notification.
Bulletins
Welcome to the second edition of our relaunched Commodities bulletin.
It is a privilege to introduce the bulletin from Singapore, with memories of contributing to our previous Commodities bulletin as a junior lawyer in London. Our global team has grown a lot since then, most recently with the addition of Peter Zaman and Dan Perera in Singapore and Matthew Cox in London, two of whom have contributed articles this month.
A series of high-profile insolvencies in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic, oil price crash and allegations of fraudulent activity has brought to the forefront the question of a seller's rights over goods when they are in transit to an insolvent buyer. While the seller might have a claim in damages or for the price, such claims will be unsecured and therefore of little to no value against an insolvent buyer.
In Acquisition 362 v. United States, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) again waded into the intersection of the AD/CVD law and Customs law. Specifically, the court ruled that a protest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs) decision must be filed within 180 days of liquidation. This is not a novel decision, but as always in AD/CVD cases with Customs, the details are crucial.
The Court of Appeal has delivered its eagerly anticipated judgment in proceedings brought by the liquidators of Mainzeal Property and Construction Ltd against its former directors, including Richard Yan and Dame Jenny Shipley. In those proceedings, the liquidators sought compensation for breach of certain statutory duties of directors engaged on a company’s insolvency: sections 135 (reckless trading) and 136 (incurring obligations) of the Companies Act 1993.