Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
What should creditors do in the event they are forced into foreign insolvency proceedings?
Tony Beswetherick, junior counsel at 20 Essex Street who acted for the applicants in Re Pan Ocean Co Ltd, considers this case and urges creditors in this position to act quickly to stay the foreign adjudication proceedings if possible and to apply to vary any stay imposed by the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 sooner rather than later.
Re Pan Ocean Co Ltd  EWHC 1500 (Ch),  All ER (D) 102 (Jun)
The applicants sought a variation of a recognition order insofar as it stayed the commencement of actions or proceedings against the first respondent company to permit them to pursue contractual claims against the company in arbitration proceedings. The Companies Court, in allowing the application, held that extant proceedings in the Republic of Korea did not prevent determination of the application and the claims had merit. In the context of substantive claims involving contracts governed by English law and agreeing to disputes being heard in arbitration in London, the order would be modified by lifting the stay preventing that arbitration.
What is the background to this case?
The case involved the question whether and in what circumstances the English court will permit arbitration proceedings to be brought within the jurisdiction against a company which has entered insolvency proceedings in another jurisdiction and where those foreign insolvency proceedings have been recognised by the English courts under the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006, SI 2006/1030 (the 2006 Regulations).
How did the issue arise?
Pan Ocean Co Ltd (a company incorporated in Korea) carried on business in the shipping industry and had entered into an agreement and charter party with the applicants under which it was to provide the services of a vessel. Both of the contracts contained English governing law clauses and agreements to refer any disputes to a panel of arbitrators in London.
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
0330 161 1234