Rebecca Parry
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- March 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198793403
- eISBN:
- 9780191927836
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198793403.003.0026
- Subject:
- Law, Company and Commercial Law
Significant differences in format and underlying policies may be noted in transaction avoidance provisions worldwide; indeed varying avoidance provisions are only one aspect of the lack of ...
More
Significant differences in format and underlying policies may be noted in transaction avoidance provisions worldwide; indeed varying avoidance provisions are only one aspect of the lack of uniformity in the world’s insolvency laws. These differences may assume great practical importance in the insolvencies of companies or individuals with dealings in more than one country. The insolvency laws of more than one jurisdiction may be invoked: for example, a company may be wound up in more than one country, or enter into concurrent rescue procedures, such as a British administration procedure and a US Chapter 11 procedure. In addition, litigation arising out of the insolvency proceedings may be pursued in more than one country. Recourse to the laws of an overseas jurisdiction may occasionally be had where the laws of the country in which the winding up is being conducted are inadequate to deal with the issues that have arisen.
Less
Significant differences in format and underlying policies may be noted in transaction avoidance provisions worldwide; indeed varying avoidance provisions are only one aspect of the lack of uniformity in the world’s insolvency laws. These differences may assume great practical importance in the insolvencies of companies or individuals with dealings in more than one country. The insolvency laws of more than one jurisdiction may be invoked: for example, a company may be wound up in more than one country, or enter into concurrent rescue procedures, such as a British administration procedure and a US Chapter 11 procedure. In addition, litigation arising out of the insolvency proceedings may be pursued in more than one country. Recourse to the laws of an overseas jurisdiction may occasionally be had where the laws of the country in which the winding up is being conducted are inadequate to deal with the issues that have arisen.
Rebecca Parry and Sharif Shivji
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- March 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198793403
- eISBN:
- 9780191927836
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198793403.003.0005
- Subject:
- Law, Company and Commercial Law
The timing of a transaction is fundamental to many of the avoidance provisions: none more so than sections 127 and 284, which operate in the period following, respectively, the presentation of a ...
More
The timing of a transaction is fundamental to many of the avoidance provisions: none more so than sections 127 and 284, which operate in the period following, respectively, the presentation of a winding-up petition against a company and the presentation of a bankruptcy petition against an individual. These are times of great potential for detrimental transactions and the sections reflect this. Upon the debtor entering liquidation or bankruptcy, these sections retrospectively make any post-petition disposition automatically void regardless of whether it was a transaction that was of benefit to the debtor. Thus, beneficial transactions, such as payments to employees and sales of assets for full market value, are affected just the same as detrimental, asset-stripping, transactions. The simplicity, and harshness, of these provisions is therefore to be contrasted with most of the other avoidance provisions, which tend to be discretionary and often require some enquiry to be made regarding the debtor’s motivations.
Less
The timing of a transaction is fundamental to many of the avoidance provisions: none more so than sections 127 and 284, which operate in the period following, respectively, the presentation of a winding-up petition against a company and the presentation of a bankruptcy petition against an individual. These are times of great potential for detrimental transactions and the sections reflect this. Upon the debtor entering liquidation or bankruptcy, these sections retrospectively make any post-petition disposition automatically void regardless of whether it was a transaction that was of benefit to the debtor. Thus, beneficial transactions, such as payments to employees and sales of assets for full market value, are affected just the same as detrimental, asset-stripping, transactions. The simplicity, and harshness, of these provisions is therefore to be contrasted with most of the other avoidance provisions, which tend to be discretionary and often require some enquiry to be made regarding the debtor’s motivations.
