Del. HC: Denying Seat to Candidate Due to Administrative Fault Would be Unjust  ||  All. HC: Not Mandatory for Passport Authority to Impound Passport of Accused Persons  ||  Raj. HC: In Absence of Statutory Rules, Denying Appt. on Basis of Minimum Height is Discriminatory  ||  MP HC: Party Required to Lay Factual Foundation for Getting Benefit of Section 65 of Evidence Act  ||  Ker. HC: Settlement of Cases Including Offence of Rape & POCSO Act Offences is Not Permissible  ||  Gujarat High Court: Wife Allowed to Become Guardian & Manager of Husband in Coma  ||  SC: Partition of Property Can’t be Done by Metes & Bounds in Chandigarh  ||  SC Approves Requirement for Judicial Officers to be Converse With Local Language  ||  Kerala High Court: Denial of Ordinary Leave Reduces Convict’s Chances of Rehabilitation  ||  Delhi HC Issues Circular Regarding Pass-Overs or Adjournments in Bail, Parole Matters    

Re Conchubar Aromatics Ltd and other matters - (10 Dec 2015)

Singapore HC preemptively restrains creditor meeting

Company

Singapore High Court granted an order of restraint against creditors of a company in receivership, installing, essentially, a moratorium till the Applicants could restructure and rescue the company. Under Section 210(10) of the Companies Act, the court is empowered to restrain any such creditor meetings that could jeopardize attempts to revive the company, save when a resolution for winding up of the company had already been passed or agreement reached between the company and its creditors. The Court concluded that for exercise of its power, there must be a proposal for compromise or arrangement only, holding of a meeting was not a prerequisite. Determining the proposal of the Applicants to be sufficiently feasible under a “broad brush assessment” and nothing to show that the proposal was not bona fide, restraint order for 10 weeks was passed.

Tags : SINGAPORE   RESTRAINT   CREDITOR MEETING   PREEMPT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved