An Outline of The EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings
|
|
- Colleen Hampton
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 An Outline of The EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings Sandy Shandro Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer June 2003 ( )
2 CONTENTS PART ONE - A GUIDE T O THE REGULATION... 1 INTRODUCTION...1 SCOPE OF APPLIC ATION OF THE REGULATION...2 PRINCIPAL PROVISIONS OF THE REGULATION...4 IMPACT OF THE REGULATION...9 PART TWO A NOTE ON BRAC RENT A-CAR INTERNATIONAL INC...12 LD553456/6+ ( ) Page i
3 PART ONE - A GUIDE T O THE REGULATION INTRODUCTION On 29 May 2000 the EU Council adopted the Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings (the Regulation). The Regulation came into force on 31 May To a great extent, the Regulation replicates the text of the draft EC convention on insolvency proceedings 1995 (the Convention). The Convention failed to receive the required unanimous support as, due to the underlying territorial concerns over Gibraltar, the UK failed to sign within the prescribed time. The Convention therefore lapsed on 23 May The adoption of the Regulation in 2000 was welcome news for the member states of the EU, some of which had been working towards pan-european consensus on insolvency issues for the past 30 years. The Regulation aims to introduce uniform conflicts of law rules for insolvency proceedings and connected judgments. This will help address the difficulties that arise when an insolvency involves a number of different European jurisdictions. It does not, however, seek to harmonise substantive law or policy as between different EU countries. LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 1
4 SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE REGULATION The Regulation came into force on 31 May With the exception of Denmark, the Regulation is directly applicable in all member states. In accordance with its Protocol to the Treaty of Amsterdam (1 May 1999), Denmark does not participate in the Regulation; however, Denmark has indicated that it will introduce parallel legislation. The objective of the Regulation is to establish common rules on cross-border insolvency proceedings, based on principles of mutual recognition and co-operation. It replaces various conventions between member states insofar as they relate to insolvency proceedings. Under article 1(1) the Regulation applies to collective insolvency proceedings which entail the partial or total divestment of a debtor and the appointment of a liquidator. Annexe A lists the insolvency proceedings covered by the Regulation, which, as currently drafted, applies to the following UK proceedings:?? winding up by, or subject to the supervision of, the court;?? creditors voluntary winding up (with confirmation by the court);?? administration;?? voluntary arrangements under insolvency legislation (both company and partnership voluntary arrangements); and?? bankruptcy and sequestration, in respect of, as appropriate, individual debtors, sole traders and most corporate entities. Under article 45, the EU Cou ncil may, by qualified majority, modify the Annexes to the Regulation and could therefore extend the list of insolvency proceedings covered by the Regulation. The moratorium provisions introduced by the Insolvency Act 2000, which aim to facilitate the chances of a company in financial difficulties putting together a voluntary arrangement, fall under the scope of the Regulation. The recently proposed moratorium provisions with respect to schemes of arrangement under section 425 of the Companies Act 1985 would not fall within the Regulation s scope, as the Regulation does not apply to those schemes of arrangement unless the scheme is part of an administration. The Regulation does not apply to administrative or other receiverships. Receiverships are excluded on the basis that they are not collective insolvency proceedings. Also, the Regulation does not apply to the administration of the insolvent estate of a deceased person. Insurance undertakings, credit institutions, investment undertakings holding funds or securities for third parties and collective investment undertakings are specifically excluded from the scope of the Regulation. The rationale for these exclusions is that such corporate entities are subject to special arrangements and their national supervisory authorities have wide-ranging powers of intervention. EU finance ministers have also reached agreement on the proposed Council directive on the LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 2
5 reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions (the credit institutions directive) and the proposed Council directive on the winding up of insurance undertakings (the insurance directive). These two directives were formally adopted in The Regulation does not have retrospective effect. It applies only to insolvency proceedings opened after the Regulation comes into force. Further, any acts performed by a debtor prior to the Regulation coming into force continue to be governed by the law that was applicable to them at the time they were carried out. In broad terms, the Regulation provides that main insolvency proceedings are to be opened in the member state where the debtor has its centre of main interests. These proceedings will have universal scope and will encompass all of the debtor s assets and affect all creditors, wherever located. The Regulation also provides that secondary proceedings may be opened in one or more other member states. Such proceedings will be limited to the assets in that state and will run in parallel to the main proceedings. Any independent territorial insolvency proceedings opened prior to the main insolvency proceedings may be converted into secondary proceedings at the behest of the insolvency office holder if this proves to be in the interests of the creditors of the main proceedings. The Regulation is of assistance princ ipally in those cases where a company or business has a branch or presence, or significant assets or activity, in more than one EU member state. Subsidiaries, being separate corporate entities, would each be subject to a different set of main insolvency proceedings. LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 3
6 PRINCIPAL PROVISIONS OF THE REGULATION MAIN PROCEEDINGS AND THE CENTRE OF MAIN INTERESTS The Regulation provides for two basic types of insolvency proceedings: main proceedings of universal scope and local proceedings of territorial scope; depending on whether they occur prior to or post commencement of the main proceedings, local proceedings are categorised as independent territorial or secondary proceedings, respectively. Article 3 of the Regulation confers the jurisdiction to open main insolvency proceedings. Member states are free to designate the national courts that may open insolvency proceedings. These insolvency proceedings will be recognised and effective in all other member states without further formalities. They will encompass all the debtor s assets on a worldwide basis, save where the Regulation specifies otherwise. Main proceedings may take the form of either reorganisation or winding up proceedings. The appointed insolvency office holder will have the authority to act in all member states, provided that he complies with the laws of the local state. Officeholders are referred to as liquidators under the Regulation. Liquidator is a defined term under the Regulation and means any person or government body whose function is to adm inister or liquidate the debtor s assets or to supervise the administration of the debtor s affairs. The authorised persons and bodies are listed in Annexe C of the Regulation. In the UK, this includes liquidators, administrators, supervisors of voluntary arrangements, the official receiver, trustees and judicial factors. The courts with jurisdiction to open the main insolvency proceedings are those of the member state where the debtor has its centre of main interests. In relation to a company, there is a rebuttable presumption that the place of the registered office is the centre of its main interests. The preamble to the Regulation states that the centre of main interests should correspond to the place where the debtor conducts the administration of his interests on a regular basis and is therefore ascertainable by third parties. Early cases suggest a willingness on the part of the courts to accept that the presumption is rebutted in a particular case (see Enron Directo ). In a previous draft of the pream ble, the centre of main interests was defined as the place where the debtor regularly has very close contact, where his main commercial interests are concentrated and the bulk of his assets are situated. It now appears that a more stringent test should apply. Despite the presumption and the explanation in the preamble, it may be difficult to predict what factual criteria would constitute a centre of main interests. Cases discussed in Part Two of this paper provide the beginnings of a guide. In an increasingly mobile business environment, it is possible that the centre of main interests may shift with time or that two or more states could qualify as the centre of main interests. Nevertheless, only one set of main proceedings is permitted. Cases decide d since the Regulation has come into force (see Re BRAC II Rent-A-Car, discussed in Part II below) make it clear that the Regulation, as anticipated, will extend the recognition of insolvency proceedings of companies incorporated outside LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 4
7 the EU. For example, if a company incorporated in the US (or a tax haven) carries on business on a regular basis in the EU and the company or its products are thereby associated with a particular EU state, it can be argued that, for the purposes of the Regulation, the US company s centre of main interests is in fact in an EU member state, rather than in the US. Numerous conflict of laws issues arise in such a case. It is therefore likely that the determination of the centre of main interests will, particularly in large and complex cases, give rise to disputes. This could delay the coordination of insolvency proceedings. In the absence of any procedure within the Regulation to resolve such disputes, they are left to be determined by the EU member state s court that first considers the question. This may give rise to inconsistency in interpretation, as it is possible that the phrase may be interpreted differently in different member states courts. However, as each member state has an obligation to interpret the terms of the Regulation in accordance with established EU law principles of statutory interpretation, such differences should be kept to a minimum. Any inconsistency in interpretation could theoretically lead to the lengthy process of a referral to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and attendant delays in protecting or dealing with the estate. How realistic this is in the context of an insolvency must be open to question. However, once a decision on the question of interpretation has been given by the ECJ (which is not bound by its previous decisions), such interpretation is likely to be followed in subsequent cases. Over time, we can expect the ECJ to evolve an independent interpretation of important concepts used in the Regulation. This is what has happened in the case of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction. SECONDARY PROCEEDINGS AND ESTABLISHMENT The Regulation permits the opening of secondary proceedings in another EU state after the opening of the main proceedings if the debtor has an establishment in that state. Establishment is defined as meaning any place of operation where the debtor carries out a non-transitory activity with human means and goods. This formulation would not only encompass a branch of a debtor but could also have a wider meaning. For example, it may include a commercial agent of the debtor. Inconsistencies in approach to interpretation between different member states courts are to be expected. Secondary proceedings may only take the form of winding up proceedings. They may be requested by the insolvency office holder in the main proceedings, or by any other person empowered to do so under the law of the state where the proceedings are sought. There is no need to re-examine the question of solvency. Secondary proceedings are to run in pa rallel with the main proceedings and are strictly territorial (as opposed to the universal nature of the main proceedings). The preamble to the Regulation states that secondary proceedings may serve different purposes. In addition to the protection of the interests of creditors located within that state, they may be used to assist the insolvency office holder in the main proceedings in circumstances where the debtor s estate is too complex to administer as a whole. Secondary proceedings will apply solely to the assets of the debtor situated in the territory of the EU member state in which the secondary proceedings are commenced or to the recovery of those assets removed from that state after the opening of the LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 5
8 secondary proceedings. The Regulation provides guidance and rules as to the meaning of location of assets but interpretation may still prove problematic. Tangible property is considered to be located in the place in which it is physically situated. Property and rights which are required to be recorded in a public register are considered to be located in the member state where they are registered. However, the location of claims is less easy to determine. Claims are considered to be located in the member state where the third party required to meet the debt in question has the centre of his main interests. As noted above, centre of main interests is open to more than one interpretation. CONVERSION OF EARLIER PROCEEDINGS It is possible for territorial insolvency proceedings to be initiated prior to the opening of the main proceedings if:?? the proceedings are requested by a creditor resident, habitually domiciled or with a registered office in the other member state, where the claim arises from the operation of the debtor s establishment in that state; or?? the main insolvency proceedings cannot be opened because of conditions laid down by local law in the state in which the debtor s centre of main interests is situated. In both cases, such proceedings are subordinated to any subsequent main proceedings. The office holder can request that they be converted into secondary winding up proceedings. APPLICABLE LAW The governing law, applicable throughout the EU, for the main insolvency proceedings will be the law of the state where the proceedings are opened. That law will (subject to some exceptions) cover such aspects as set-off, proofs of debts, the powers of the liquidators and the distribution of assets. The exceptions include:?? rights in rem (broadly, mortgages, liens and floating charges) of creditors and third parties in respect of assets situated within the territory of another member state;?? rights under contracts of employment;?? some set-off rights; and?? reservation of title clauses. Rights in rem and reservation of title provisions will be subject to the la w of the state in which the asset is situated. SETTLEMENT FINALITY REGULATIONS Another exception is that the rights and obligations of parties to a payment or settlement system or to a financial market will be governed by the law of the member state applicable to that system or market. This helpfully preserves part VII of the Companies Act 1989, which provides that the provisions of market contracts or the rules of the exchange or clearing house with respect to default and settlement will prevail over the general law of insolvency with respect to participants in recognised LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 6
9 financial markets. The London Stock Exchange, LIFFE and the London Commodity Exchange are some of the recognised financial markets under part VII of the Companies Act. The Regulation also states that the EU directive on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement systems (which was implemented in the UK by the Financial Markets and Insolvency (Settlement Finality) Regulations 1999) should take precedence over the Regulation. UNENFORCEABLE TRANSACTIONS All assets the subject of any void, voidable or unenforceable transactions may be recovered under the Regulation. This includes assets covered by special rules (for example, rights in rem, rights in respect of set-off and retention of title) and transactions governed by the Settlement Finality Regulations. Where the special rules apply, the Regulation may in certain circumstances effectively impose a double - actionability requirement in relation to the recovery of those assets. First, the suspect transaction must be capable of being avoided under the law of the main proceedings (see article 4(2)(m)). In England, this would include the provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986 relating to preferences, fraudulent preferences and transactions at an undervalue. Secondly, an action cannot be brought by the office holder in the main English proceedings to set aside a transaction subject to the law of another EU state unless the transaction could be set aside not only under English law but also under the law of that other EU state (see article 13). CREDITORS CLAIMS AND CO-OPERATION BETWEEN OFFICE HOLDERS Each creditor, wherever domiciled in the EU, has the right to assert claims with regard to the debtor s assets in each of the insolvency proceedings pending. This right extends to each member state s taxation and social security authorities, thereby eliminating the traditional rule against the enforcement of foreign revenue debts. However, this does not mean that claims will have similar prior ity in other states. A taxation authority enjoying priority status as a preferential creditor under domestic laws is likely to be able to prove only as an ordinary unsecured creditor in other member states proceedings. In order to ensure equal treatment of creditors, the distribution of assets is coordinated by the office holder and a hotchpot rule operates (this is a procedure that ensures dividends are paid evenly to creditors regardless of the number of jurisdictions in which they have lodged claims). The Regulation also attempts to protect the interests of all creditors by empowering the liquidator in the main proceedings to lodge the claims of all creditors in any secondary proceedings where it serves the creditors interests. Any surplus of assets in the secondary proceedings, after payment of all claims provable under local law, must be remitted to the insolvency office holder in the main proceedings. There may be an incentive for local creditors, especially for preferential creditors such as taxation authorities, to institute secondary proceedings where they have provable claims under local law, if a significant amount of the troubled company s assets are LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 7
10 situated in that locality. This is because all claims provable under local law must be paid first (to the extent that the local assets permit). Although a local creditor may only recover a percentage of the debt in this manner this may still be a higher percentage recovery than the general body of creditors could hope to recover from the pool of assets in the main proceeding. An added attraction is that one large tranche of the debt could be recouped relatively quickly, as opposed to piecemeal by payments of dividends. It may therefore be of little relevance to the local creditor that he will receive no further dividend. An obvious consequence of such action is that the percentage recovery for non-local creditors will decrease proportionately. In appropriate cases the effects of the secondary proceedings may be postponed, albeit temporarily. The insolvency office holder in the main proceedings may apply for a stay (in whole or in part) of the secondary proceedings on the basis that they affect the interests of the creditors in the main proceedings. Such a stay may only be rejected by the court with jurisdiction over the secondary proceedings if it is manifestly of no interest to the creditors in the main proceedings. A stay may be ordered for up to three months and is renewable but the court may require the insolvency holder in the main proceedings to effect suitable measures to safeguard the interests of the creditors in the secondary proceedings and of individual classes of creditors. The Regulation does not elaborate on the meaning of suitable measures. RECOGNITION OF INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS IN OTHER MEMBER STATES Both orders opening proceedings (main or secondary) and judgments handed down in connection with those proceedings are automatically recognised in all other member states. Generally, the opening of main proceedings produces the same effect in other member states as under the law of the state where the proceedings are opened, as long as no secondary proceedings are opened in the other states. Main proceedings may not be challenged in any other member state s court, save where they are manife stly contrary to public policy and subject always to the right to open secondary proceedings, where appropriate. The insolvency office holder may, subject to provisions regarding reservation of title clauses and certain rights in rem, remove assets, bring claims or bring actions to set aside transactions in other member states. In doing so, he will be subject to the laws of the member state within which he is taking such action, in particular with regard to procedures for the realisation of assets. A member state may, however, refuse to enforce such orders (in whole or in part) on public policy grounds. Where secondary proceedings (which may only be winding up proceedings) are opened, however, local law applies and no other member state may challenge the effects of those proceedings (see article 17(2)). The proceedings may lead to a restriction on creditors rights, in particular a stay or discharge, but secondary proceedings (unlike main proceedings) will only have extraterritorial effect if creditors with assets situated in other member states consent to such a restriction on their rights. It is not clear whether this limitation applies only to rights in rem (for example, rights under mortgages and liens) or has more general application. LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 8
11 IMPACT OF THE REGULATION The Regulation will have an impact on many aspects of financial and security transactions. The impact on due diligence, the taking of security, set-off, contractual netting and the Regulation s impact on the emerging rescue culture, are considered below. DUE DILIGENCE When entering into a banking transaction with a customer, it is standard banking practice to undertake due diligence on the customer as at the date of the transaction. Under the Regulation, however, the determination of the centre of main interests will be considered as at the date of the opening of main proceedings rather than the date when the transaction is entered into. Simply relying on the presumption that the place of incorporation of a company is the centre of its main interests may be risky. Difficulties may arise if, unknown to the bank, the customer moves the centre of its main interests to another country. A bank may find that the jurisdictions it believed were relevant to a particular transaction are no longer relevant at the time of insolvency. This could hinder the effective enforcement of security and the commencement of any insolvency process under the Regulation. An obvious concern for banks is that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for them to monitor exactly w here a customer s centre of main interests is at all times throughout the duration of the banking relationship. Due diligence difficulties will arise when banks take security and consider their rights of set-off, both of which are discussed below. SECURITY It is essential for banks to know the risks they run if a customer becomes insolvent and what rights they will have against an insolvent customer. For example, if an English registered company with multi-european national interests were to borrow from an English bank, the bank could take a fixed and floating charge as security for the loan. How will the Regulation affect the enforcement of such security by the English bank? Under the Regulation, assuming that the customer s centre of main interests is and remains located in England, the security will (subject to usual vires/anti-avoidance issues under English law) be valid in the event that main insolvency proceedings are commenced in England. If secondary insolvency proceedings were opened in another member state (for example, Italy), these proceedings would not affect the validity of the security in England, as the secondary proceedings would be limited to the assets of the company within Italy. In the event that the company s centre of main interests were or became located in France, under the Regulation the main insolvency proceedings would be opened in France and French law would apply. However, French law would not apply to the English security because, as mentioned above, the Regulation protects certain security LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 9
12 rights (rights in rem), including floating charges. Whether this recognition may extend to include the recognition of any receiver appointed under such security is not clear. Receivers are not included in the list of insolvency office holders recognised under the Regulation. It is arguable, however, that as their appointment is an exercise of a right in rem, other states are required to recognise the appointment of a receiver. Whether other member states courts would agree with this interpretation remains to be seen. SET-OFF Article 6 of the Regulation states that the opening of insolvency proceedings shall not affect the right of creditors to demand the set-off of their claims against the claims of the debtor, where such set-off is permitted by the law applicable to the insolvent debtor s claim. There is no reference to the law applicable to the creditor s claim. Under English law, rule 4.90 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 provides that set-off of mutual debts is mandatory in all liquidations and cannot be excluded by agreement between the parties. As set-off is compulsory under English law, its availability is an integral part of the credit assessment undertaken by banks when lending to an English company. The availability of legally enforceable set-off remedies may also have an impact on risk weighting and, therefore, the capital cost of a transaction. Under article 4.2(d) of the Regulation, however, the English set-off rule will not apply in the liquidation of an English company that has its centre of main interests in an EU state other than England. The law of that other state would apply. The right to set-off may not be available under that state s law. As mentioned above, it may be difficult to advise with any certainty as to where a company s centre of main interests is located. It may not as a practical matter be possible to ensure that it does not shift during the life of the transaction. This will have an impact on the ability to advise conclusively as to whether rule 4.90 will apply. CONTRACTUAL NETTING Contractual netting is not specifically addressed under the Regulation but the provisions relating to set-off (see articles 4.2(d) and 6) and payment systems and financial markets (see article 9) are relevant in this context. It appears that, at least under English law, contractual netting may not be caught by article 6 of the Regulation. In 1996, the Financial Law Panel (the Panel), in its evidence to the House of Lords sub-committee on the practical implications of the Convention (as the Regulation then was) put forward the view that article 6, under English law, only addressed equitable set-off and had no impact on contractual netting or insolvency set-off. The issue was one of semantics: article 6 only contemplates a debtor s claim as opposed to claims, whereas contractual netting involves agreement (usually under a master agreement) that disparate claims from a large number of individual contracts of the insolvent debtor will be set off against the various claims of the creditor, the end result being a net loss or profit for one party. However, the Panel did consider that the text of article 6 could be interpreted differently in other member states. As the term set-off is used to describe different mechanisms in different member states, article 6 might be interpreted in such a way that does not confine its operation to equitable set-off. If such a wider interpretation is LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 10
13 given it might affect the operation of contractual netting. This could have unpredictable consequences for the international financial markets. Article 9 provides that the effects of insolvency proceedings on the rights and obligations of the parties to a payment or settlement system or to a financial market shall be governed solely by the law of the member state applicable to that system or market. This means that Part VII of the Companies Act 1989 and the Financial Markets and Insolvency (Settlement Finality) Regulations 1999 will govern netting agreements used in recognised financial markets. However, many netting agreements regulate contracts that do not take place on one of the recognised markets and are therefore excluded from the scope of article 9. RESCUE CULTURE There has been a clear trend in recent years towards the rehabilitation of companies in financial difficulties (for example, by statutory moratoria or informal reorganisation measures) rather than placing them into liquidation. Many European jurisdictions have formal procedures designed to facilitate rescues, which grant companies a breathing space in which to put together a rescue plan. Generally, such procedures prevent creditors from enforcing their rights while the company attempts a rescue. As long as there is only one proceeding, the Regulation will improve the prospects of success of a company rescue, as the recognition of the insolvency proceedings under the Regulation will mean that any moratorium on the enforcement of security rights or proceedings will be recognised throughout the EU. It is interesting to note that the moratorium procedure under the Insolvency Act 2000 is universal in scope as voluntary arrangements are specified as insolvency proceedings in Annexe A. On the other hand, since it is still possible for secondary proceedings to be opened in other states, rescue may be impeded. As discussed above, secondary proceedings can only be liquidation proceedings and therefore do not include the rehabilitation proceedings of the local jurisdiction. This means that an office holder seeking to put in place a rescue plan could be at the mercy of a group of creditors in a particular jurisdiction who calculate that the cost/liability ratio in this jurisdiction means that a secondary liquidation better serves their interests. LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 11
14 PART TWO A NOTE ON BRAC RENT-A-CAR INTERNATIONAL INC On 14 January of this year, Lloyd J. made an administration order in respect of a Delaware company, Brac Rent-A-Car Inc. (Brac Rent-A-Car). This event is of more than passing significance. It confirms the birth of an expanded jurisdictional reach not only in the UK but also throughout the EU. The position until recently was that a UK court had no jurisdiction to make an administration order in respect of a foreign company save in a limited number of exceptional cases. The exceptions were those jurisdictions often uncharitably described as cricket playing nations whose courts were accorded special status under UK insolvency law by virtue of membership in the Commonwealth. The result of this anomalous position was that companies incorporated in jurisdictions such Anguilla, Tuvalu and the Turks and Caicos Islands could be the subject of English administration proceedings but companies incorporated in the US or anywhere in the EU could not. As discussed in Part One of this paper, the Regulation came into force on 31 May The Regulation applies in its entirety in all Member States except Denmark. As far as the UK is concerned, it applies to liquidations, administrations and bankruptcies. There will be jurisdiction wherever the Centre of Main Interests of the debtor is located in a Member State. In the case of a corporate debtor, the Centre of Main Interests is presumed to be located in the jurisdiction where the registered office is situated (i.e. the jurisdiction of incorporation). However, the presumption may be rebutted if it can be established that at the time the petition is heard the debtor actually conducts the administration of its interests somewhere else within the EU. This was established in Brac Rent-A-Car: it did not trade in the US, but instead ran its business from the UK, engaged most of its employees and had its banking relationships here. Once it was determined that its Centre of Main Interests was in the UK, the fact that Brac s jurisdiction of incorporation was outside the EU was irrelevant. A number of consequences flow from this decision. First, it should now be assumed that there will be jurisdiction in any EU Member State to subject a non-eu company to those local insolvency proceedings contemplated in the Regulation whenever it can be established that the Centre of Main Interests of the company in question is in that Member State. Quite how jurisdictions which traditionally recognise only those insolvency proceedings taking place in the jurisdiction of incorporation will cope with this remains to be seen. Will a Belgian court, for example, now not only recognise such proceedings but also accept primary jurisdiction over the winding up proceedings of a French company on the grounds that its Centre of Main Interests is in Belgium? They may ha ve no choice. Secondly, while one has read countless articles about the long arm jurisdiction of the US courts, particularly in cases involving Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, once can see an interesting conflict emerging where both a US bankruptcy court and an EU court claim co-extensive jurisdiction over a US-incorporated company whose Centre of Main Interests is in an EU Member State. In Brac Rent-A-Car, it so happened that the company was in Chapter 11 in the US, but the US Creditors Committee supported the application. One wonders what the position would have been had the Centre of Main Interests LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 12
15 point been more evenly-balanced, or if the Committee had opposed the application. One can readily imagine cases where the risk of inconsistent results could be difficult to manage. Thirdly, where the Centre of Main Interests of a UK company is elsewhere in the EU, a UK court is now deprived of its traditional insolvency jurisdiction based on corporate domicile: the main insolvency proceedings must be elsewhere. Finally, and in stark contrast, where a UK company s Centre of Main Interests is outside the EU altogether then the traditional jurisdiction could continue to be exercised, and such a company could be the subject of a UK administration proceeding. Only vigilance by judges and counsel throughout the EU will minimise the risk of chaos in the face of jurisdictional complexities of such magnitude. The boards of companies with significant operations in the EU, foreign officeholders already appointed to such companies and creditors wherever located will need comprehensive advice on the most appropriate strategy to adopt before deciding on what insolvency proceeding to commence within the EU and where to do so. Sandy Shandro Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 65 Fleet Street London EC4Y 1HS Tel: sandy.shandro@freshfields.com LD553456/6+ ( ) Page 13
32000R1346 OJ L 160, , p (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, 1. Council regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings
32000R1346 OJ L 160, 30.6.2000, p. 1-18 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, 1 Council regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Council regulation (EC)
More informationCLIFFORD CHANCE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
CLIFFORD CHANCE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP SCXP/C1458/04790/HNM 16 February 2000 The Bond Market Association 40 Broad Street New York NY 10004-2373 USA Dear Sirs Cross-Product Master Agreement 1. INTRODUCTION
More informationDirective 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions
Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
More informationDirective 98/26/EC on Settlement Finality in Payment and Securities Settlement Systems
Directive 9826EC on Settlement Finality in Payment and Securities Settlement Systems 1 Directive 9826EC The Financial Markets and Insolvency (Settlement Finality) Regulations 1999 1 Text Applicability
More informationDirective 98/26/EC on Settlement Finality in Payment and Securities Settlement Systems
1 final report 2 A: 1 N: a SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS The provisions of this Directive shall apply to: (a) any system as defined in Article 2(a), governed by the law of a Member State and operating in any currency,
More informationAdministration. What is Administration? Who can benefit from it?
What is? Who can benefit from it? The Procedure in brief is designed to provide an umbrella procedure to permit a company to formulate a rescue or restructuring strategy or to maximise the value of the
More informationFOA netting opinion issued in relation to the FOA Netting Agreements, FOA Clearing Module and ISDA/FOA Clearing Addendum
NETTING ANALYSER LIBRARY The Futures & Options Association 2nd Floor 36-38 Botolph Lane London EC3R 8DE 4 December 2013 Dear Sirs, FOA netting opinion issued in relation to the FOA Netting Agreements,
More informationDecree No. 57 for 2009 Establishing a Tribunal to decide the Disputes Related to the Settlement of the Financial Position of
Decree No. 57 for 2009 Establishing a Tribunal to decide the Disputes Related to the Settlement of the Financial Position of Dubai World and its Subsidiaries We, Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of
More informationINSOLVENCY REGULATIONS [ ]
Consultation Paper No. 4 of 2015 Annex A INSOLVENCY REGULATIONS [ ] LNDOCS01/874215.12 CONTENTS Part 1 : General... 1 Part 2 : Administration... 2 Part 3 : Receivership... 83 Part 4 : Winding Up... 92
More informationSolving Cross-Border Insolvency Problems Can you ever have too many lawyers?
Solving Cross-Border Insolvency Problems Can you ever have too many lawyers? Introduction 1. It is becoming increasingly common that officeholders in England and Wales are having to deal with the realisation
More informationINSOLVENCY ACT NO. 18 OF 2015 LAWS OF KENYA
LAWS OF KENYA INSOLVENCY ACT NO 18 OF 2015 Revised Edition 2016 [2015] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General wwwkenyalaworg [Rev 2016] No 18 of
More informationKENYA GAZETTE SUPPLEMENT
SPECIAL ISSUE Kenya Gazette Supplement No. 159 (Acts No. 18) REPUBLIC OF KENYA KENYA GAZETTE SUPPLEMENT ACTS, 2015 NAIROBI, 15th September, 2015 CONTENT Act PAGE The Insolvency Act, 2015...1023 PRINTED
More informationBIA s.267. UNCITRAL Model Law. Proposed Wording
BIA s.267 267. The purpose of this Part is to provide mechanisms for dealing with cases of cross-border insolvencies and to promote (a) cooperation between the courts and other competent authorities in
More informationSHEPHERD+WEDDERBURN. 9 December The Futures &Options Association 2nd Floor Botolph Lane London EC3R8DE. Dear Sirs
OUR REF C0348.25/TZS/AMK SHEPHERD+WEDDERBURN 9 December 2013 The Futures &Options Association 2nd Floor 36-38 Botolph Lane London EC3R8DE Dear Sirs FOA netting opinion issued in relation to the FOA Netting
More informationUNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW (UNCITRAL)
UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW (UNCITRAL) UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment PREAMBLE CONTENTS Part One UNCITRAL MODEL LAW ON CROSS-BORDER INSOLVENCY
More informationINSOLVENCY ACT, (Act No.4 of 2013) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I - PRELIMINARY
INSOLVENCY ACT, 2013 (Act No.4 of 2013) Sections ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I - PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation PART II - BANKRUPTCY Sub-Part I Declaration of Bankruptcy
More informationLAWS3014 Insolvency Law Summary (Concise)
LAWS3014 Insolvency Law Summary (Concise) Contents Administering Bankruptcies... 5 Introduction to Bankruptcy... 6 Purposes of Bankruptcy... 6 History of bankruptcy law... 6 Modern bankruptcy law:... 6
More informationINSOLVENCY REGULATIONS 2015
INSOLVENCY REGULATIONS 2015 CONTENTS Part 1 : Administration... 2 Part 2 : Receivership... 84 Part 3 : Winding-Up... 94 Part 4 : Protection of Assets in Liquidation and Administration... 119 Part 5 : Application
More informationSTATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 4 (E & W)
STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 4 (E & W) DISQUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS ENGLAND AND WALES Introduction 1. This statement of insolvency practice is one of a series issued by the Council of the Society
More informationWinding up by court 568. Application of Chapter 569. Circumstances in which company may be wound up by the court
PART 11 WINDING UP CHAPTER 1 Preliminary and interpretation 559. Interpretation (Part 11) 560. Restriction of this Part 561. Modes of winding up general statement as to position under Act 562. Types of
More informationBRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS INSOLVENCY ACT, 2003
BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS INSOLVENCY ACT, 2003 LAST UPDATED: APRIL 2017 BVI INSOLVENCY ACT COMPENDIUM PREFACE We have prepared this Insolvency Act, 2003 Compendium as a service to our clients. The principal
More informationREGULATION (EU) No 650/2012 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
REGULATION (EU) No 650/2012 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic
More informationCOMPANIES (AMENDMENT NO.8) (JERSEY) LAW 200-
CONSULTATION PAPER NO 4. 2003 CONSULTATION PAPER 2003-04 COMPANIES (AMENDMENT NO.8) (JERSEY) LAW 200- AND BANKRUPTCY (DÉSASTRE) (AMENDMENT NO.5) (JERSEY) LAW 200- Issued July 2003 CONSULTATION PAPER The
More informationSTATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 4 (SCOTLAND) DISQUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS
STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 4 (SCOTLAND) 1 INTRODUCTION DISQUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS 1.1 This Statement of Insolvency Practice is to be read in conjunction with the Explanatory Foreword. 1.2 This
More informationEUROPEAN MODEL COMPANY ACT (EMCA) CHAPTER 3 REGISTRATION AND THE ROLE OF THE REGISTRAR
EUROPEAN MODEL COMPANY ACT (EMCA) CHAPTER 3 REGISTRATION AND THE ROLE OF THE REGISTRAR Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section
More informationChapter 4 Creditors Voluntary Winding Up Application of Chapter. MKD/096/AC#
[PART 11 WINDING UP Chapter 1 Preliminary and Interpretation 549. Interpretation (Part 11). 550. Restriction of this Part. 551. Modes of winding up - general statement as to position under Act. 552. Types
More informationSTATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 4 DISQUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS ENGLAND AND WALES
STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 4 DISQUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS ENGLAND AND WALES New legislative provisions for the reporting obligations of insolvency office holders on the conduct of those who formerly
More informationELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 15
C H A P T E R 15 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 15 UNIFORM PARTNERSHIP ACT (1914) Part I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS 1. Name of Act This act may be cited as Uniform Partnership Act. 2. Definition of Terms
More informationGUIDE. Administration Guidance Notes
GUIDE Guidance Notes Cork Gully LLP February 2013 Guidance Notes Contents Purpose of 1 Entry routes to 2 Nature of 6 Process of 7 Based on a solid heritage we are an advisory firm bringing clarity to complex
More informationINSOLVENCY ACT I assent. (Consolidated version with amendments as at 21 December 2013) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY
The text below has been prepared to reflect the text passed by the National Assembly on 31 March 2009 and is for information purposes only. The authoritative version is the one published in the Government
More information2010 No. BANKRUPTCY. The Protected Trust Deeds (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2010
Draft Regulations laid before the Scottish Parliament under section 72(2) of the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985 for approval by resolution of the Scottish Parliament. SCOTTISH STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2010
More informationCorruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1999
Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1999 (Enacted in 1999) PART I Preliminary 1. Short title 1. This Act may be cited as the Corruption, Drug Trafficking
More information557. Hearing of proceedings otherwise than in public Power of court to order the return of assets which have been improperly transferred.
557. Hearing of proceedings otherwise than in public. 558. Power of court to order the return of assets which have been improperly transferred. 559. Reporting to Director of Corporate Enforcement of misconduct
More informationRevision of the European Insolvency Regulation
Revision of the European Insolvency Regulation DRAFT AMENDED VERSION OF COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1346/2000 ON INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS AS AMENDED BY COUNCIL REGULATIONS OF 12 APRIL 2005, 27 APRIL 2006,
More informationBANKRUPTCY ACT (CHAPTER 20)
BANKRUPTCY ACT (CHAPTER 20) Act 15 of 1995 1996REVISED EDITION Cap. 20 2000 REVISEDEDITION Cap. 20 37 of 1999 42 of 1999 S 380/97 S 126/99 S 301/99 37 of 2001 38 of 2002 An Act relating to the law of bankruptcy
More informationSECOND SUPPLEMENT TO THE GIBRALTAR GAZETTE No of 28 November, 2002
SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO THE GIBRALTAR GAZETTE No. 3315 of 28 November, 2002 LEGAL NOTICE NO. 92 OF 2002 FINANCIAL SERVICES ORDINANCE THE FINANCIAL MARKETS AND INSOLVENCY (SETTLEMENT FINALITY) REGULATIONS
More informationINSOLVENCY STATUTORY MATERIALS FOR DISCUSSION IN LECTURE 12 ON 15 AUGUST 2017 CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 STATUTORY DEMANDS
INSOLVENCY STATUTORY MATERIALS FOR DISCUSSION IN LECTURE 12 ON 15 AUGUST 2017 CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 STATUTORY DEMANDS Part 5.4 Winding up in insolvency Division 1 When company to be wound up in insolvency
More informationChapter 15 Recognition Mandatory and Fully Encumbered Assets Are Property of the Debtor Protected by Automatic Stay. November/December 2013
Chapter 15 Recognition Mandatory and Fully Encumbered Assets Are Property of the Debtor Protected by Automatic Stay November/December 2013 Pedro A. Jimenez Mark G. Douglas More than eight years after chapter
More informationStock Exchange Code. 09 January 2017
09 January 2017 Contents Definitions... 4 Scope 6 1. Conditions for Operation of the Markets... 7 1.1. Resources and Facilities...7 1.2. Compliance Arrangements...7 1.3. Complaints...7 1.4. Maintenance
More informationREPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE ACTS SUPPLEMENT. Published by Authority NO. 17] FRIDAY, MARCH 31 [2017
REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE ACTS SUPPLEMENT Published by Authority NO. 17] FRIDAY, MARCH 31 [2017 First published in the Government Gazette, Electronic Edition, on 30 March 2017 at 5 pm. The
More informationUNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency
UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency Preamble The purpose of this Law is to provide effective mechanisms for dealing with cases of cross-border insolvency so as to promote the objectives of: (a)
More information! This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 license:
IAN FLETCHER INTERNATIONAL INSOLVENCY LAW MOOT 2018 Problem created pro bono by members of INSOL International and International In the Matter of Electric Bike Holdings Ltd Insolvency Institute, assisted
More informationEnforcing Security in Scotland
A Shepherd and Wedderburn guide INTRODUCTION As a starting point, it is worth mentioning that the methods of taking security over property in Scotland and England are different. Scots law does not recognise
More informationSTATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 3A (SCOTLAND) 2009 TRUST DEEDS
STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 3A (SCOTLAND) 2009 TRUST DEEDS 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This Statement of Insolvency Practice (SIP) is one of a series of guidance notes issued to licensed insolvency practitioners
More information2013 No. 318 BANKRUPTCY
S C O T T I S H S TAT U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2013 No. 318 BANKRUPTCY The Protected Trust Deeds (Scotland) Regulations 2013 Made - - Coming into force - - 6th November 2013-28th November 2013 The
More informationChapter 15 Turns One: Ironing Out the Details. November/December Mark G. Douglas
Chapter 15 Turns One: Ironing Out the Details November/December 2006 Mark G. Douglas October 17, 2006 marked the first anniversary of the effectiveness of chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code as part of the
More informationWinding up. Tribunal. Voluntary (Now governed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code)
Winding up Tribunal (the provision relating to the inability to pay debts now covered by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code) Voluntary (Now governed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code) JURISDICTION:
More informationPreferences Under the Bankruptcy Act
Fordham Law Review Volume 3 Issue 1 Article 2 1916 Preferences Under the Bankruptcy Act Jacob J. Lesser Recommended Citation Jacob J. Lesser, Preferences Under the Bankruptcy Act, 3 Fordham L. Rev. 11
More informationCHAPTER 2. Appointment of examiner
PART 10 EXAMINERSHIPS CHAPTER 1 Interpretation 508. Interpretation (Part 10) 509. Power of court to appoint examiner 510. Petition for court 511. Independent expert s report CHAPTER 2 Appointment of examiner
More informationVIRGIN ISLANDS INSOLVENCY (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) REGULATIONS, 2004 ARRANGEMENT OF REGULATIONS
VIRGIN ISLANDS INSOLVENCY (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) REGULATIONS, 2004 ARRANGEMENT OF REGULATIONS Section 1. Citation and commencement. 2. Interpretation. 3. Creditors arrangements. 4. Receivers. 5. Liquidation
More informationCompanies Act No. 10 of Certified on: / /20. INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. No. 10 of ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS.
Companies Act 1997 No. 10 of 1997. Companies Act 1997. Certified on: / /20. INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. No. 10 of 1997. Companies Act 1997. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. 1. Compliance with Constitutional
More informationProposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 2.3.2016 COM(2016) 107 final 2016/0060 (CNS) Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters
More informationGUIDELINES FOR COMMUNICATION AND COOPERATION BETWEEN COURTS IN CROSS-BORDER INSOLVENCY MATTERS
GUIDELINES FOR COMMUNICATION AND COOPERATION BETWEEN COURTS IN CROSS-BORDER INSOLVENCY MATTERS INTRODUCTION A. The overarching objective of these Guidelines is to improve in the interests of all stakeholders
More informationEnforcement of Foreign Orders Under Chapter 15
Enforcement of Foreign Orders Under Chapter 15 Jeanne P. Darcey Amy A. Zuccarello Sullivan & Worcester LLP June 15, 2012 CHAPTER 15: 11 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. Purpose of chapter 15 is to Provide effective
More informationCorporate Rescue Mechanism & Winding Up: A New Dimension
Corporate Rescue Mechanism & Winding Up: A New Dimension DR HARIATI MANSOR 3 April 2017 Fakulti Undang-Undang UiTM Shah Alam Dr Hariati Mansor 1 Winding up Liquidation /winding up of a company is the process
More informationTURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS TRUSTS BILL 2015 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES
TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS TRUSTS BILL 2015 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES PART I PRELIMINARY CLAUSE 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation 3. Meaning of insolvent 4. Meaning of personal relationship
More information(Unofficial translation, amendments up to 642/2006 included)
(Unofficial translation, amendments up to 642/2006 included) Act on Commercial Banks and Other Credit Institutions in the Form of a Limited Company 28.12.2001/1501 Chapter 1 General provisions Section
More informationGlobal Restructuring & Insolvency Guide
Global Restructuring & Insolvency Guide Singapore Overview and Introduction Given the notable preference of creditors and stakeholders in companies for restructuring as opposed to liquidation, this chapter
More informationA Bankruptcy Primer for Landlord & Tenant Matters
A Bankruptcy Primer for Landlord & Tenant Matters I. Bankruptcy Code Provisions This article focuses on the relationship between, and the rights and obligations of, the landlord and tenant in bankruptcy
More informationInsolvency Act 1986 Page 1. Insolvency Act CHAPTER 45
Insolvency Act 1986 Page 1 Insolvency Act 1986 1986 CHAPTER 45 Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited. UK Statutes Crown Copyright. Reproduced by permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
More informationCorporate Insolvency [No. 9 of THE CORPORATE INSOLVENCY ACT, 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
Corporate Insolvency [No. 9 of 2017 279 THE CORPORATE INSOLVENCY ACT, 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS Section 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation PART II RECEIVERSHIP
More informationUNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment
UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment UNITED NATIONS UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment UNITED NATIONS New York, 1999 NOTE Symbols of
More informationBill of Legislation amending Act No. 161/2002, on Financial Undertakings, as subsequently amended. Art. 1
Bill of Legislation amending Act No. 161/2002, on Financial Undertakings, as subsequently amended. (Submitted to the 136 st legislative session of the Althingi, 2008-2009) Art. 1 The words a party managing
More informationImprovement of Corporate Insolvency Law Legislative Proposals Consultation Document
Improvement of Corporate Insolvency Law Legislative Proposals Consultation Document 15 July 2013 By email: corporate_insolvency_law@fstb.gov.hk Division 4 Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau 15/F,
More informationJUDGMENT JUDGMENT GIVEN ON. 4 July Lord Mance Lord Sumption Lord Hodge Lady Black Lord Lloyd-Jones. before
Trinity Term [2018] UKSC 34 On appeal from: [2016] EWCA Civ 1092 JUDGMENT Goldman Sachs International (Appellant) v Novo Banco SA (Respondent) Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation Fund and others (Appellants)
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 59 Article 2 1
Article 2. Uniform Partnership Act. Part 1. Preliminary Provisions. 59-31. North Carolina Uniform Partnership Act. Articles 2 through 4A, inclusive, of this Chapter shall be known and may be cited as the
More information1. An outline of the domestic asset recovery regime; 2. An overview of the way in which the UK can assist overseas
12727Page 1 of 27 THE UK ASSET RECOVERY REGIME Introduction This presentation is divided into two parts: 1. An outline of the domestic asset recovery regime; 2. An overview of the way in which the UK can
More informationTRUST LAW DIFC LAW NO.6 OF Annex A
DIFC LAW NO.6 OF 2017 Annex A CONTENTS PART 1: GENERAL... 6 1. Title and repeal... 6 2. Legislative authority... 6 3. Application of the Law... 6 4. Scope of the Law... 6 5. Date of Enactment... 6 6. Commencement...
More informationBankruptcy (Amendment) 1 A BILL. i n t i t u l e d. An Act to amend the Bankruptcy Act [ ]
Bankruptcy (Amendment) 1 A BILL i n t i t u l e d An Act to amend the Bankruptcy Act 1967. [ ] ENACTED by the Parliament of Malaysia as follows: Short title and commencement 1. (1) This Act may be cited
More information11 USC 361. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see
TITLE 11 - BANKRUPTCY CHAPTER 3 - CASE ADMINISTRATION SUBCHAPTER IV - ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS 361. Adequate protection When adequate protection is required under section 362, 363, or 364 of this title of
More informationUNCI TRAL M odel L aw on Recognition and Enfor cement of I nsolvency-relat ed Judgments
UNCI TRAL M odel L aw on Recognition and Enfor cement of I nsolvency-relat ed Judgments Decision of the United Nations Commission on I nter national Tr ade L aw (UNCITRAL) The United Nations Commission
More informationThe Japanese rule on cross-border insolvency had been severely criticized by many foreign lawyers 1, because it
New Japanese Legislation on Cross-border Insolvency As compared with the UNCITRAL Model Law Kazuhiko Yamamoto Professor of Law, Hitotsubashi University 1. Summary on the New Japanese Legislation (1) History
More informationTHE INSOLVENCY BILL, 2010 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES PART I PRELIMINARY PART II INSOLVENCY PRACTITIONERS. Insolvency Practitioners.
THE INSOLVENCY BILL, 2010 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES Clause 1 Short title and commencement. 2 Interpretation. 3 Application. PART I PRELIMINARY PART II INSOLVENCY PRACTITIONERS Insolvency Practitioners. 4
More information15 December rue de Valois Paris - Tél.: 33 (0)
LEGAL OPINION from the Legal High Committee for Financial Markets of Paris (HCJP) to the French Prudential Supervisory and Resolution Authority (ACPR) further to its request of 19 October 2015 15 December
More informationThe Insolvency (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (No (N.I. 19)) The Insolvency (Northern Ireland) Order 1989
The Insolvency (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (No. 2405 (N.I. 19)) View annotations Version 1 of 1 N O R T H E R N I R E L A N D O R D E R S I N C O U N C I L 1989 No. 2405 (N.I. 19) The Insolvency (Northern
More informationBanking (Special Resolution Regime) Act 2013
25 th July 2013 NOTICE Banking (Special Resolution Regime) Act 2013 The Bermuda Monetary Authority ( the Authority or BMA ) has proposed a statutory framework for a special resolution regime for banks
More informationISDA LEGAL OPINIONS & BREXIT
ISDA LEGAL OPINIONS & BREXIT A number of pieces of EU legislation provide certain benefits in relation to contractual arrangements between EU/EEA-based counterparties. This document seeks to provide a
More informationUNIDROIT CONVENTION ON SUBSTANTIVE RULES FOR INTERMEDIATED SECURITIES
UNIDROIT CONVENTION ON SUBSTANTIVE RULES FOR INTERMEDIATED SECURITIES Geneva, 9 October 2009 2. UNIDROIT CONVENTION ON SUBSTANTIVE RULES FOR INTERMEDIATED SECURITIES THE STATES SIGNATORY TO THIS CONVENTION,
More informationTURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS COMPANIES ORDINANCE 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS COMPANIES ORDINANCE 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY SECTION 1. Short title and commencement Interpretation 2. Interpretation 3. Meaning of company and foreign company
More informationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT
ANGUILLA INTERIM REVISED STATUTES OF ANGUILLA 2000 CHAPTER 7 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT Showing the Law as at 16 October 2000 Published by Authority Printed in The Attorney General s Chambers ANGUILLA Government
More informationFOUNDATIONS LAW CONTENTS
DIFC LAW NO. 3 OF 2018 CONTENTS PART 1: GENERAL... 1 1. Title... 1 2. Legislative authority... 1 3. Application of the Law... 1 4. Scope of the Law... 1 5. Date of enactment... 1 6. Commencement... 1 7.
More informationCONSTITUTION. B a n k o f S o u t h Pa c i f i c L i m i t e d
CONSTITUTION B a n k o f S o u t h Pa c i f i c L i m i t e d Contents 1. PRELIMINARY 1 1.1 Definitions 1 1.2 Interpretation 3 1.3 Headings and Listing 3 1.4 Voting entitlements and the Specified Time
More informationTHE LAWS OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS. STATUTORY INSTRUMENT No. 45 of 2005 INSOLVENCY RULES, 2005
THE LAWS OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS STATUTORY INSTRUMENT No. 45 of 2005 INSOLVENCY RULES, 2005 Based on the Insolvency Rules, 2005 (Statutory Instrument No. 45 of 2005) and amendments made by the Insurance
More informationREGULATION (EC) No 593/2008 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. of 17 June on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)
REGULATION (EC) No 593/2008 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN
More information8118/16 SH/NC/ra DGD 2
Council of the European Union Brussels, 30 May 2016 (OR. en) Interinstitutional File: 2016/0060 (CNS) 8118/16 JUSTCIV 71 LEGISLATIVE ACTS AND OTHER INSTRUMTS Subject: COUNCIL REGULATION implementing enhanced
More informationscc Doc 15 Filed 06/19/18 Entered 06/19/18 12:49:01 Main Document Pg 1 of 10
Pg 1 of 10 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration), 1 Debtor in a Foreign Proceeding. Chapter 15 Case No. 18-11470
More informationSURETY TODAY PRESENTATION Given by Michael A. Stover and George J. Bachrach Wright, Constable & Skeen, LLP Baltimore, MD January 8, 2018
SURETY TODAY PRESENTATION Given by Michael A. Stover and George J. Bachrach Wright, Constable & Skeen, LLP Baltimore, MD January 8, 2018 Bankruptcy: The Surety s Proof of Claim (MIKE) This is the third
More informationBANKRUPTCY (SCOTLAND) BILL
BANKRUPTCY (SCOTLAND) BILL DELEGATED POWERS MEMORANDUM INTRODUCTION 1. This memorandum has been prepared by the Scottish Government in accordance with Rule 9.4A of the Parliament s Standing Orders, in
More informationCONSTITUTION. Silver Fern Farms Co-operative Limited
CONSTITUTION Silver Fern Farms Co-operative Limited Adoption of new constitution I certify that this document was adopted as the Constitution of the Company by Special Resolution on 30 July 2009. E R H
More informationThis report is a copyright of Nishith Desai Associates. No reader should act on the basis of any statement contained herein
93-B MITTAL COURT, NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI 400 021 INDIA. TEL: +91 22 5669 5000 FAX: +91-22 5669 5001 220 CALIFORNIA AVENUE., SUITE 201 PALO ALTO, CA 94306 USA. TEL: +1 650 325 7100 FAX: +1 650 325 7300 PRESTIGE
More informationPapua New Guinea Consolidated Legislation
1 of 229 07/10/2011 13:13 Home Databases WorldLII Search Feedback Papua New Guinea Consolidated Legislation You are here: PacLII >> Databases >> Papua New Guinea Consolidated Legislation >> Companies Act
More informationmg Doc 6 Filed 02/16/12 Entered 02/16/12 11:22:25 Main Document Pg 1 of 16
Pg 1 of 16 CHADBOURNE & PARKE LLP Counsel for the Petitioners 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10112 (212) 408-5100 Howard Seife, Esq. Andrew Rosenblatt, Esq. Francisco Vazquez, Esq. UNITED STATES
More informationInsolvency Law Corporate and Personal
Insolvency Law Corporate and Personal Fourth Edition Andrew R Keay LLB; MDiv; LLM; PhD; Barrister (England and Wales); Legal Practitioner (Aust) Professor of Corporate and Commercial Law Centre for Business
More informationCorporate Reorganization Act
Corporate Reorganization Act (Act No. 154 of December 13, 2002) The Corporate Reorganization Act (Act No. 172 of 1952) shall be fully revised. Chapter I General Provisions (Article 1 to Article 16) Chapter
More informationThe things a security taker needs to know about receivership under BVI law
GUIDE The things a security taker needs to know about receivership under BVI law December 2016 Contents Introduction 3 What is receivership? 3 What types of receiver may be appointed? 3 How does the right
More informationBrexit Essentials: Dispute resolution clauses
Brexit Essentials: Dispute resolution clauses In this briefing, we consider the potential impact of Brexit on contractual dispute resolution clauses. EU law underpins these clauses. When that law ceases
More informationIntroduction. Types Of Insolvency Office Holder. IOH in BA
Advokaadibüroo VARUL AS Kaluri 2, 51004 Tartu, Estonia tel +372 730 1610 fax +372 730 1620 tartu@varul.com www.varul.com Introduction In Estonia the insolvency procedures are regulated by three laws. Bankruptcy
More informationTECHNICAL AND FURTHER EDUCATION BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES
TECHNICAL AND FURTHER EDUCATION BILL EXPLANATORY NOTES What these notes do These Explanatory Notes relate to the Technical and Further Education Bill as introduced in the House of. These Explanatory Notes
More informationCASSELS BROCK MEMORANDUM RE: American College of Bankruptcy: International Insolvency Resources TO: Shari Bedker FROM: Bruce Leonard
CASSELS BROCK E. Bruce Leonard DIRECT LINE: (416) 869-5757 FAX: (416) 640-3027 E-MAIL: bleonard@casselsbrock.com MEMORANDUM TO: Shari Bedker FROM: Bruce Leonard DATE: August 1, 2012 RE: American College
More informationBANKRUPTCY AFTER BREXIT RECOGNITION OF INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE UK INSOL EUROPE'S VIEW
1 BANKRUPTCY AFTER BREXIT RECOGNITION OF INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE UK INSOL EUROPE'S VIEW Until the arrival of the European Insolvency Regulation in 2002 1 there were no rules of European law
More information