Key Highlights

I. Supreme Court: Scope of intervention by High Courts in cases of orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal

II. Supreme Court: State legislature cannot enact law which affects the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

III. Supreme Court: Difference between inadequacy of reasons in arbitral award and unintelligible awards

IV. NCLT: RP can take possession of a corporate debtor's assets which are subject matter of litigation to facilitate the corporate insolvency resolution process

The Indian Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) has seen several challenges in recent times. The Indian Government has been proactive in responding to these. In response to the recent set of challenges, the Government intends to implement another round of amendments to the IBC. The key takeaways from this proposed amendment are discussed below.

Virtual Currency: State of pandemonium continues

I. Relief for foreign investors: Supreme Court of India sets aside the Bombay High Court ruling in IDBI Trusteeship Services case The Supreme Court of India in the case of IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited vs. Hubtown Limited (decided on November 15, 2016) set aside a Bombay High Court ruling which had garnered quite a lot of attention among the foreign investors and in the legal circles. N e d e r l a n d s e F i n a n c i e r i n g s- M a a ts c h a p p i j v o o r Ontwikkelingslanden N.V.

New disclosure requirements imposed on listed companies under the Securities and Futures Ordinance (“SFO”) have been effective since on 1 January 2013.

Under these requirements, a listed company is obliged to disclose inside information as soon as reasonably practicable when the information has or ought reasonably have come to the knowledge of an officer of the listed company.

1. INTRODUCTION 

1. In May 2019, the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce ("UKJT"), a subsidiary of the UK's LawTech Delivery Panel, issued a consultation paper on the status of cryptoassets and smart contracts in English private law ("Consultation Paper"). In his foreword to the Consultation Paper, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Chancellor of the High Court of England and Wales (the "Chancellor") commented that "perceived legal uncertainty" was the reason for some lack of confidence amongst market participants and investors in cryptoassets and smart contracts.¹

The Supreme Court has again urged the legislature to consider whether the outright prohibition on professional litigation funding and the assignment of bare causes of action continues to be warranted as the ever-increasing cost of litigation is putting access to the courts beyond the reach of many.

While the Court accepted that this is an area in need of careful and considered legislative reform, it warned that unless a real effort is made by the legislature to improve access to justice, it will have "no option" but to step in, "undesirable and all as unregulated change might be."

What happens if you assign your right to litigate to a person or company that is unconnected to the event that creates the right to litigate? In the recent Supreme Court case of SPV Osus Ltd –v- HSBC Institutional Trust Services (Ireland) Limited & Ors [2018] IESC 44, the Supreme Court held that this sort of transaction is void under Irish law and contrary to public policy.

Madoff ponzi scheme litigation

Infrastructure & Economic Development
This briefing sets out some of the key points of the 2016 Programme for
Government, which includes a wide range of policy proposals in areas
such as infrastructure and economic development, public administration,
constitutional change, financial services, taxation and employment law and
industrial relations.
It is expected that the Government’s Legislation Programme will be
published soon, setting out the legislation that the new Government will
promote in order to give effect to the Programme for Government.

Facts