Although the EU Insolvency Regulation and the UNCITRAL Model Law have been with us for some time, decisions involving the court’s recognition of foreign proceedings continue to evolve and will – of necessity – turn on the specific facts of every case. We investigate two recent decisions which came up with very different results.
The background – Re OGX Petroloeo E Gas S.A. [2016] EWHC 25
On November 1 2007 the State Commission for Insolvency presented the Preliminary Bill for an Insolvency Act to the minister of justice. The bill contains rules for the recognition of insolvency proceedings in non-EU countries and the law applicable to foreign proceedings. This update examines those rules and their relationship to the EU Insolvency Regulation and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency.
Case Law
One of the challenges currently faced with Nigeria’s standing in relation to international trade is the adequacy of the country’s insolvency laws and regulations on cross-border insolvency. Trade has taken an international dimension over the decades, a corporation in one country will have interests – goods, assets, employees and claims in other countries. During the life of a company and as it continues to trade, there is the likelihood for the company to fail such that its liabilities far exceed its assets and it goes insolvent.
Singapore’s firm trajectory towards becoming an international hub for debt restructuring received a boost with the Companies (Amendment) Act 2017 coming into force on 23 May 2017.
In Brief
For the first time, a court has adopted the ‘centre of main interest’ (COMI) as grounds at common law to recognise foreign insolvency proceedings.
The decision earlier this year by the High Court of Singapore (the Court) recognised a Japanese bankruptcy trustee appointed to companies incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (BVI):
On July 6, 2012, in Lightsquared LP (Re),1 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the "Ontario Court"), released reasons that clarify the criteria for the identification of the centre of main interest ("COMI") of an applicant seeking recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings as "Foreign Main Proceedings" pursuant to Section 46 of the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act ("CCAA").2
What happens when Canadian entities are part of a corporate group with international operations that seeks to restructure? A recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Re Massachusetts Elephant & Castle Group, Inc. provides guidance on how Canadian courts will consider recognition of foreign restructuring proceedings.
Re Gyro-Trac (USA) Inc. (“Gyro-Trac””) is the first appellate decision to consider the centre of main interests (COMI) of a corporate group. In that case, the Quebec Court Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision to recognize proceedings under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (“Chapter 11”) and to stay Canadian bankruptcy proceedings against Canadian members of a corporate group.