Offshore Litigation

Blog

Offshore Litigation

Contributors

Jonathan Addo
Jonathan Addo
  • Jonathan Addo

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Ian Mann
Ian Mann
  • Ian Mann

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nick Hoffman
Nick Hoffman
  • Nick Hoffman

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Vicky Lord
Vicky Lord
  • Vicky Lord

  • Partner
  • Shanghai
Chai Ridgers
Chai Ridgers
  • Chai Ridgers

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
William Peake
William Peake
  • William Peake

  • Partner
  • London
Peter Ferrer
Peter Ferrer
  • Peter Ferrer

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jeremy Child
Jeremy Child
  • Jeremy Child

  • Partner
  • London
Claire Goldstein
Claire Goldstein
  • Claire Goldstein

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jayson Wood
Jayson Wood
  • Jayson Wood

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Phillip Kite
Phillip Kite
  • Phillip Kite

  • Partner
  • London
Stuart Cullen
Stuart Cullen
  • Stuart Cullen

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Lorinda Peasland
Lorinda Peasland
  • Lorinda Peasland

  • Consultant
  • Hong Kong
Paul Madden
Paul Madden
  • Paul Madden

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Jessica Williams
Jessica Williams
  • Jessica Williams

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Paula Kay
Paula Kay
  • Paula Kay

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Andrew Thorp
Andrew Thorp
  • Andrew Thorp

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Henry Mander
Henry Mander
  • Henry Mander

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Johnstone
Andrew Johnstone
  • Andrew Johnstone

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nicola Roberts
Nicola Roberts
  • Nicola Roberts

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
  • Singapore
Julie Engwirda
Julie Engwirda
  • Julie Engwirda

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Paul Smith
Paul Smith
  • Paul Smith

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands

Hong Kong leads the way with its inaugural recognition of Mainland appointed Administrators

In the recent case of Re CEFC Shanghai International Group Limited [2020] HKCFI 167, with reasons for its decision delivered on 13 January 2020, the Hong Kong Court granted its first recognition order of Administrators appointed in the Mainland. The possibility of such recognition has been a popular subject amongst restructuring professionals in Hong Kong for some time and has formed a lively subject topic for debate at recent industry conferences. The question now is how this will be developed going forward.

CEFC Shanghai International Group Limited (the Company) is a Mainland-incorporated investment holding company with subsidiaries in Hong Kong. On 24 November 2019 the Shanghai Court appointed Administrators to the Company under the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law (the EBL). The Administrators have for all material purposes the same functions as liquidators in the Hong Kong system.

The Company’s assets include HK$7.2 billion of receivables (the Receivables) owed by its Hong Kong subsidiary (now in liquidation). The Company had submitted a proof of debt in the Hong Kong subsidiary’s liquidation but before the Shanghai Court appointed Administrators to the Company, a creditor of the Company obtained a garnishee order nisi in respect of the Receivables. The Administrators sought the recognition order to stop the creditor from obtaining a garnishee order absolute and to preserve the Receivables for the benefit of all creditors.

In granting the recognition order, the Hong Kong Court was satisfied that the Mainland liquidation is a collective insolvency proceeding because it encompasses all of the debtor’s assets under Article 30 of the EBL. It also satisfied the general criteria that the foreign insolvency proceedings were opened in the Company’s country of incorporation. The application was supported by the Shanghai Court’s letter of request to maintain the principle of collectivity and pari passu distribution. 

More importantly, the Hong Kong Court noted that the purpose of a recognition order is to facilitate one overall liquidation to realise the debtor’s assets, to determine creditors’ claims and to distribute all available assets to creditors on a pari passu basis under the control of insolvency practitioners appointed under one insolvency regime. Accordingly, the recognition order granted imposed a stay of the garnishee proceedings in Hong Kong to promote a worldwide orderly liquidation or restructuring.

The Hong Kong Court also considered that the House of Lords decision in Galbraith v Grimshaw [1910] AC 508, which was decided on narrow grounds, did not preclude the Hong Kong Court from assisting Mainland insolvency proceedings. In Galbraith, it was held that where a Scottish bankruptcy occurred after an English garnishee order nisi, the judgment creditor prevailed over the Scottish trustee in bankruptcy. The Hong Kong Court held that this is inconsistent with contemporary cross-border insolvency law and its reasoning is inapplicable to modern common law cross-border insolvency assistance.” 

However, of particular import is Mr. Justice Harris’ concluding comment that the extent to which the Hong Kong Court will provide assistance in the future must be decided on a case by case basis and the development of the law in this area is likely to be influenced by the whether or not the Mainland promotes a unitary approach to cross border insolvencies. The position on that currently, is far from clear.

The decision is a major landmark for Hong Kong as one of the most developed jurisdiction in cross-border restructuring. It is a true reflection that universalism is the fundamental purpose of cross-border insolvency assistance.

Hong Kong leads the way with its inaugural recognition of Mainland appointed Administrators

Leave A Comment