Case Background 14th June, 2022 -The Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) handed down a judgment in Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited [2022] HKCFA 11 (“CFA Decision”) yesterday, ruling on the nature of benefits conferred by a winding up order required to wind up a foreign incorporated company. The jurisdiction of
Gall Advises on Ongoing Restructuring of Luckin Coffee Inc
Gall is working together with Carey Olsen and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan to advise an Ad Hoc Group of bondholders (“AHG”) in relation to an offshore scheme of arrangement in the ongoing restructuring of Luckin Coffee Inc (“Luckin Coffee”) in Cayman.
Reconsidering the Need for Parallel Schemes of Arrangement
The cautious and prudent approach for distressed companies pursuing a Hong Kong scheme of arrangement is to simultaneously pursue a parallel scheme in their home jurisdiction, even if most if not all of its debts are governed by Hong Kong laws. The rationale is to prevent hostile creditors from disrupting the implementation of the scheme in another jurisdiction, thereby better insulating the distressed company.
Recent Case Update: Re Rare Earth Magnesium Technology Group [2020] HKCFI 2260
We recently acted for the joint provisional liquidators of Rare Earth Magnesium Technology Group (“the Company”) appointed by the Supreme Court of Bermuda in a conventional application for the recognition of the Bermuda soft-touch provisional liquidation of the Company.
Stan Cheung examines how the Hong Kong Court may use its’ wide discretion in making a decision on costs after the costs hearing has already taken place.
In a recent costs decision handed down in March 2018 in a committal proceedings, the Court of First Instance (“CFI”) in China Metal Recycling (Holdings) Ltd v Chun Hei Man [2018] HKEC 676 considered whether it could, in exercising the wide discretion on costs under Section 52A of the High Court Ordinance and O.62, r.2(4) of the Rules of the High Court, rely on matters or findings in the judgment handed down by the Court of Appeal (“CA”) after the costs hearing had already taken place.
