Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conflict of Laws

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Cross-Border Insolvency

  • 1047 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter addresses the question of how the existing principles of conflict of laws have a bearing upon the interpretation of the Model Law and how they fit within the existing domestic law of a State:

  • inconsistent rules is one of the factors contributing to the present inconsistences in the interpretation of the Model Law

  • a number of situations where conflicts exist in the domestic rules applicable in insolvency matters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, General Assembly, Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law UN Publications Sales No E.05.V.10 (United Nations, 2005), 68 [80].

  2. 2.

    Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), s 58.

  3. 3.

    Davies, Bell and Brereton, see footnote 116, 727-8, [36.7].

  4. 4.

    Ibid, 728 [36.8]; Barcelo v Electrolytic Zinc Company of Australasia Ltd (1932) 48 CLR 391; Global Distressed Alpha Fund 1 Limited Partnership v PT Bakrie Investindo [2011] 1 WLR 2038, 2042 [13].

  5. 5.

    Cambridge Gas Transport Corporation v The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (of Navigator Holdings PLC & Ors) [2007] 1 AC 508, 517-8 [20].

  6. 6.

    See, e.g., Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 474(2); Blacktown Concrete Pty Ltd v Ultra Refurbishing and Construction Pty Ltd (1988) 43 NSWLR 484, 500-1.

  7. 7.

    Cambridge Gas Transport Corporation v The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (of Navigator Holdings PLC & Ors) [2007] 1 AC 508, 517-8, [20].

  8. 8.

    See, e.g., Morguard Investments Ltd v De Savoyne [1990] 3 SCR 1077.

  9. 9.

    Club Resorts Ltd v Van Breda [2012] 1 SCR 572, 592 [29].

  10. 10.

    J.-G Castel, Canadian Conflict of Laws (Butterworths, 2nd ed, 1986), 496-7.

  11. 11.

    Ibid, 501.

  12. 12.

    Goode, see footnote 276, 792-3 [16–15].

  13. 13.

    Ian F Fletcher The Law of Insolvency (Sweet & Maxwell, 2002) 739 [28-012].

  14. 14.

    American Law Institute, see footnote 178 § 6.

  15. 15.

    Lea Bilayer, Perspectives on the Law Conflict of Laws—Foundations and Future Directions (Little Brown & Co, 1991).

  16. 16.

    See, e.g., Simon C. Symonds ‘Choice of Laws in the American Courts in 2010: Twenty-Fourth Annual Survey’ (2011) 59 American Journal of Comparative Law 303; Simon C. Symonds ‘Choice of Laws in the American Courts in 2011: Twenty-Fifth Annual Survey’ (2012) 60 American Journal of Comparative Law 291. It is not the purpose of this book to examine in detail the various common law rules that exist in each of the fifty States in the USA in respect of the issue of conflict of laws.

  17. 17.

    Look Chan Ho, ‘Conflict of Laws in Insolvency Transaction Avoidance’ (2008) 20 Singapore Academy of Law Journal 343, 351.

  18. 18.

    Steven Harris, ‘Choosing the Law Governing Security Interests in International Bankruptcies’ (2007) 32 Brooklyn Journal of International Law 905, 917.

  19. 19.

    Wade, see footnote 475, 144.

  20. 20.

    Davies, Bell and Brereton see footnote 116, 733, [36.23].

  21. 21.

    See Art 21(1)(e).

  22. 22.

    Davies, Bell and Brereton, see footnote 116, 735, [36.32].

  23. 23.

    Ibid, 736 [36.34].

  24. 24.

    Levy v Reddy [2009] FCA 63 (6 February 2009).

  25. 25.

    Collins, Lord et al. (eds), Dicey, Morris and Collins on The Conflict of Laws (Sweet & Maxwell, 15 ed, 2012) see footnote 158, 1758 [31R-086]. © Thomson Reuters (Professional) UK Limited 2012. Reproduced with permission of The Licensor through PLSclear.

  26. 26.

    See Sects. 6.2 and 6.3.

  27. 27.

    Regulation EC No 1346/2000 of the European Council on Insolvency Proceedings [2000] OJ L 160/1, Art 1(2).

  28. 28.

    United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Guide to Enactment of The UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, UN Doc A/CN.9/442 (19 December 1997) as approved by GA Res A/RES/52/158 (1997) (30 January 1998) and amended by GA Res A/RES/68/107 (2013) (16 December 2013) [56].

  29. 29.

    See United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Insolvency of Large and Complex Financial Institutions 42nd session, UN Doc A/CN.9/WG.V/WP.109 (24 September 2012).

  30. 30.

    See, e.g. Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) s 116(3) which requires Australian assets to be applied first in the discharge of Australian liabilities and Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 562A which allows for the flow through of reinsurance proceeds to the insured. This difference was commented on by the House of Lords in McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869, 877, 882, [2, 32]. A Similar priority for domestic creditors is conferred by the Insurers (Reorganisation and Winding Up) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/353), giving effect to the European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/17/EC on the reorganisation and winding up of insurance companies.

  31. 31.

    For example, an Australian railroad and tourism company goes into voluntary administration in Australia. It has assets in Canada, USA, New Zealand and the United Kingdom where it operates a small protected railway. It has establishments in all states other than Canada. It is recognised in Canada as there is no requirement for the company to have an establishment. It is also recognised in New Zealand as it has an establishment in that state. The company cannot be recognised in the USA or United Kingdom as railroad companies are excluded.

  32. 32.

    See Re Barnet, 737 F 3d 238 (2nd Cir, 2013).

  33. 33.

    Re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd, 511 BR 361 (Bankr, SD NY, 2014).

  34. 34.

    McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869.

  35. 35.

    Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2008 (Cth) Sch 1.

  36. 36.

    McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869, 879 [19].

  37. 37.

    Ibid [21].

  38. 38.

    Re Swissair Schweizerische Luftverkehr-Aktiengesellschaft [2010] BCC 667, 672 [14–15].

  39. 39.

    Such that the value of the property exempted ‘shall be reduced to the extent that such value is attributable to any portion of any property that the debtor disposed of within the 10-year period ending on the date of the filing of the petition with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor and that the debtor could not exempt’.

  40. 40.

    Summit Agarwal, Chunking Liu and Lawrence Mielnicki ‘Exemption laws and consumer delinquency and bankruptcy behaviour: an empirical analysis of credit card data’ (2003) 43 The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 273, 277. The article also contains a table of exemptions.

  41. 41.

    Art X, § 4(a)(1).

  42. 42.

    Bank Leumi Trust Co. v Lang, 898 F Supp 883, 885 (SD Fla, 1995).

  43. 43.

    Re Addison, 540 F 3d 805, (8th Cir, 2008).

  44. 44.

    Which principle is explained in McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869, 887 [50].

  45. 45.

    Sarra, see footnote 75, 24-7. Hotchpot has been used in Australian relation to cases involving trust funds and managed investment schemes were some creditors have already received a return on their money invested and other haven’t and all creditors are making claims against a common fund and is based upon equitable principles see, Re French Caledonia Travel Services Pty Ltd (in liq) (2003) 59 NSWLR 361; Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) v Idylic Solutions Ltd (2009) 76 ACSR 129; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Letten (No 20) [2012] FCA 1283 (19 November 2012). It is uncertain as to whether this equitable principle applies to managed investments schemes because its property is held on trust: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 601AC (2) or whether it applies more generally.

  46. 46.

    It was accepted in McGrath v Riddell that the priority awarded to domestic creditors under s116(3) of the Insurance Act 1973 only applied to assets that existed as at the date of liquidation: New Cap Reinsurance Corp v Faraday Underwriting (2003) 117 FLR 52; HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd (2005) 215 ALR 562.

  47. 47.

    Fletcher, see footnote 3, 494.

  48. 48.

    Westbrook, ‘‘Breaking Away: Local Priorities and Global Asset’’ see footnote 2.

  49. 49.

    Arts 3 and 4.

  50. 50.

    Edward J. Janger, ‘‘Reciprocal Comity’’ (2010) 46 Texas International Law Journal 441.

  51. 51.

    McGrath v Riddell, [2008] 3 All ER 869, 881 [28].

  52. 52.

    American Law Institute and International Insolvency Institute, n 32.

  53. 53.

    See, e.g. Ian Fletcher, a, 508-12; Global Principles for Cooperation in International Insolvency Cases and Global Guidelines for Court to Court Communications in International Insolvency Cases, presented to the 89th Annual Meeting of the American Law Institute on 23 May 2012 and unanimously approved by the International Insolvency Institute membership at its 12th Annual Conference, Court de Cassation, Paris, 22 June 2012, http://iiiglobal.org/component/jdownloads/viewdownload/36/5897.html, principle 13.

  54. 54.

    See McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869, 878 [16–17]; Re Tri-Continental Exchange Ltd 349 BR 627 (Bankr, ED Cal, 2006).

  55. 55.

    Re Tri-Continental Exchange Ltd, 349 BR 627, 636 (Bankr, ED Cal, 2006).

  56. 56.

    Ibid, 636.

  57. 57.

    11 USC § 553 (a) (2012).

  58. 58.

    See Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 533C(2); Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 86(2); Insolvency Act 2006 s 254(2); Insolvency Act 1986 c45 s 323(3).

  59. 59.

    Ho, see footnote 75, 214.

  60. 60.

    See especially, Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s86; Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 553C; Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act 1985 (Can) s97(3), Companies Creditors Arrangement Act 1985 RSC 1985, c C-36 s21; Insolvency Act 2006 ss 255–263; Companies Act 1993 ss 239AEG–239AEP, 310–310O; Insolvency Act 1986, c45, s 323; 11 USC § 553 (2012); see, generally, Look Chan Ho ‘‘Enforcing English set-off right in the US bankruptcy court: In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc’’, (2009) 2 Corporate Rescue and Insolvency 124.

  61. 61.

    See United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, General Assembly, Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law UN Publication Sales No E.05.V.10 (United Nations, 2005), 70 [85].

  62. 62.

    The court has power under 11 USC §§ 1521 (2012) to grant a foreign representative power to bring proceedings except under ss 522, 544, 545, 547, 548, 550 and 724(a).

  63. 63.

    See especially, Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 120–122; Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 588FA–588FF, 461; Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-31985 (Can) ss 38, 95–101; Companies Act 1993 ss 292–301; Insolvency Act 2006 ss 204–212; Insolvency Act 1986, c45, ss 339–346; 11 USC §§ 547 (2012).

  64. 64.

    Ho, see footnote 724, 371.

  65. 65.

    Rubin v Eurofinance SA [2013] 1 AC 236, 274 [115–117], 278 [132]: distinguishing and disapproving of Cambridge Gas Transport Corporation Limited v Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (of Navigator Holdings PLC & Ors) (Isle of Man) [2007] 1 AC 508.

  66. 66.

    Ibid, 279–280.

  67. 67.

    Jodie Kirshner above 692, 30.

  68. 68.

    Tristan G Axelrod, ‘UK Supreme Court Highlights Parochial Roadblocks to Cooperative Cross-Border Insolvency in Rubin v Eurofinance SA’ (2014) 31 Wisconsin International Law Journal 818.

  69. 69.

    Lord Collins et al. see footnote 158.

  70. 70.

    Re Fairfield Sentry Ltd, 452 B.R 64, 78–80 (Bankr, SD NY, 2011); Re Condor Insurance Ltd, 601 F.3d 319, 329 (5th Cir, 2010).

  71. 71.

    Re Nortel Networks Inc, 469 BR 478, 498-9 (Bankr, D Del, 2012).

  72. 72.

    United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, General Assembly, Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law UN Publications Sales No E.05.V.10 (United Nations, 2005), 71 [90].

  73. 73.

    Judge Allan L Gropper, ‘‘The Payment of Priority claims in Cross-Border Insolvency Cases’’ (2011) 56 Texas International Law Journal 559, 560-2.

  74. 74.

    Ibid, 562.

  75. 75.

    John A.E. Pottow, ‘‘A New Role for Secondary Proceedings in International Bankruptcies’’ (2011) 46 Texas International Law Journal, 579, 584.

  76. 76.

    Clark & Goldstein, see footnote 8, 556.

  77. 77.

    Gropper, see footnote 780, 568.

  78. 78.

    See, e.g. Re Collins & Aikman Europe SA [2006] EWHC (Ch) (9 June 2006).

  79. 79.

    See United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, General Assembly, Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law, UN Publications Sales No E.05.V.10 (United Nations, 2005), 68, [82] where it describes the applicable law as lex rei sitae which has the same meaning as lex situs.

  80. 80.

    United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Guide to Enactment of The UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, UN Doc A/CN.9/442 (19 December 1997) as approved by GA Res A/RES/52/158 (1997) (30 January 1998) and amended by GA Res A/RES/68/107 (2013) (16 December 2013) [188].

  81. 81.

    Ibid, [146].

  82. 82.

    Cross-Border Insolvency Act 2008 (Cth) s 16.

  83. 83.

    Suk v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd [2016] FCA 1404 (23 November 2016) [21].

  84. 84.

    In the case of restructuring proceedings, if concurrent voluntary administration proceedings are commenced in Australia, a secured creditor with security over the whole or substantially the whole of the assets of the company can only seek to enforce its security during the decision period see Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 441A; in respect of liquidations see s 471C.

  85. 85.

    Yu v STX Pan Ocean Co Ltd (South Korea) (2013) 23 FCR 189, 202-3 [41].

  86. 86.

    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 471B.

  87. 87.

    Ibid, s 468(4).

  88. 88.

    Ibid, s 500(2).

  89. 89.

    Re Vassal Pty Ltd [1983] 2 Qd R 769.

  90. 90.

    Re Asiatic Electric Co Pty Ltd [1970] 2 NSWR 612; Australian Gypsum Industries Pty Ltd v Dalesun Holdings Pty Ltd (2015) 106 ACSR 79.

  91. 91.

    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 440D.

  92. 92.

    Auburn Council v Austin Australia Pty Ltd (Admin Apptd) (2004) 22 ACLC 766; Brian Rochford Ltd (Administrator Appointed) v Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of NSW (1999) 17 ACLC 152.

  93. 93.

    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 441A.

  94. 94.

    See Suk v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd [2016] FCA 1404 (23 November 2016).

  95. 95.

    Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd v Legend International Holdings Inc [2016] VSC 308 (2 June 2016) [133].

  96. 96.

    ML Ubase Holdings Co Ltd v Trigem Computer Inc (2007) 69 NSWLR 577, 595 [53] (Brereton J).

  97. 97.

    Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 s271; Companies Creditors Arrangement Act, RSC 1985, c C-36 s 48.

  98. 98.

    (2011) 81 CBR (5th) 102 [33].

  99. 99.

    Art 20(2).

  100. 100.

    Art 20(2).

  101. 101.

    Insolvency Act 1986 c45 s 130 (2); Enasarco v Lehman Brothers Finance SA [2014] EWHC 34 (Ch) (16 January 2014); Ackers v Samba Financial Group (2014)16 ITELR 808; [2014] EWHC 540 (Ch) (28 February 2014); Nordic Trustee ASA & Anor v Ogx Petróleo E Gás SA (Em Recuperação Judicial) & Anor [2016] EWHC 25 (Ch) (12 January 2016).

  102. 102.

    Larsen and Ziegler v Navios International Inc [2012] 1 BCLC 151 [16]; Langley Construction v Wells [1969] 2 All ER 46.

  103. 103.

    Insolvency Act 1986 c45 ss, 72A- 72H, Sch B1 s 41.

  104. 104.

    Such rights must be read as being subject to the provisions contained in Insolvency Act 1986 c45 ss 72A–72H.

  105. 105.

    Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 SR 2006/1030 sch 1 Art 20(3).

  106. 106.

    Nordic Trustee ASA & Anor v Ogx Petróleo E Gás SA (Em Recuperação Judicial) & Anor [2016] EWHC 25 (Ch) (12 January 2016) [53].

  107. 107.

    Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd v Amanda Shipping SA [2011] 2 All E.R (Comm) 481, 492 [45–46], cited in United Drug (UK) Holdings Ltd v Bilcare Singapore Pte Ltd [2013] EWHC 4335 (Ch) (19 December 2013).

  108. 108.

    Ibid, 496 [64].

  109. 109.

    Re JSC BTA Bank, 434 BR 334, 342 (Bankr, SD NY, 2010).

  110. 110.

    Re Atlas Shipping A/S, 404 B.R 729, 739 (Bankr, SD NY, 2009); Re Spansion Inc, 418 BR 84, 90 (Bankr D Del, 2009); Contra Re Worldwide Education Services Inc 494 BR 494, 497-9 (Bankr, C D Cal, 2013).

  111. 111.

    Re Soundview Elite Ltd, 2017 WL 1155694 (Bankr SD NY, 2017).

  112. 112.

    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 58AA re definition ‘Court’; Auburn Council v Austin Australia Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed) (2004) 22 ACLC 766; Brian Rochford Ltd (Administrator Appointed) v Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of NSW (1999) 17 ACLC 152; Neil Hannan ‘International Commercial Arbitration and Cross-Border Insolvency’ (2014) XVII International Trade and Business Law Review 447.

  113. 113.

    Re International Tin Council [1987] Ch 419, 446; Bilta (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Nazir [2013] 1 All ER 375, 391-2 [42–43].

  114. 114.

    See Hall v Woof (1908) 7 CLR 207, 211.

  115. 115.

    11 USC §§ 362(a), 1110(2) (2012).

  116. 116.

    Andrew DeNatale and Jonathon D Canfield ‘Minimum Jurisdictional Threshold for U.S. Bankruptcy Courts in Cross-border Insolvency Cases’ (2013) 2 Insol World 30.

  117. 117.

    11 USC § 109(a).

  118. 118.

    Effectively creditors which fall within the Bankruptcy Court’s jurisdiction because they have an office or assets within the USA could be found to be in contempt if they seek to act inconsistently with the stay.

  119. 119.

    Re Gold & Honey Ltd, 410 BR 357 (Bankr, ED NY, 2009). See also Re Soundview Elite Ltd, 503 BR 571 (Bankr, SDNY, 2014).

  120. 120.

    Re Gold & Honey Ltd, 410 BR 357, 369 (Bankr, ED NY, 2009).

  121. 121.

    Chapter 11 allows business trusts to file for protection under Chapter 11: Rubin v Eurofinance SA [2010] 1 All ER (Comm) 81, 85 [10].

  122. 122.

    See, e.g., Re Massachusetts Elephant & Castle Group Inc (2011) 81 CBR (5th) 102; Re Graceway Canada Company (2011) 209 ACWS (3d) 555; [2011] ONSC 6292(4 October 2011); Re Hartford Computer Hardware Inc (2012) 94 CBR (5th) 20; Re T&N Ltd [2004] EWHC 2361 (Ch) (21 October 2004).

  123. 123.

    See, e.g., Re T&N Ltd [2005] 2 BCLC 488; [2004] EWHC 2361 (Ch) (21 October 2004).

  124. 124.

    See, e.g. John A.E Pottow, ‘‘The Myth (and Realities) of Forum Shopping in Transnational Insolvency’’ (2006) 32 Brooklyn Journal of International Law 785, 808.

  125. 125.

    Re Awal Bank BSC 455 BR 73, 81 (Bankr, SD NY, 2011).

  126. 126.

    Nick Segal, The Effect of Reorganisation Proceedings on Security Interests: The Position under English and U.S. Law (2007) 32 Brooklyn Journal of International Law 927.

  127. 127.

    Re Speciality Equipment Companies Inc, 3 F.3d 1043 (7th Cir, 1993); Re Metromedia Fiber Network Inc, 416 F. 3d 136 (2nd Cir, 2005); Contra Re Vitro SAB de CV, 701 F.3d 1031 (5th Cir, 2012).

  128. 128.

    Re Continental Airlines, 203 F. 3d 203 (3rd Cir, 2000); Re Metromedia Fiber Network Inc 416 F. 3d 136 (2nd Cir, 2005).

  129. 129.

    Re Vitro SAB de CV, 701 F.3d 1031 (5th Cir, 2012).

  130. 130.

    Re Metcalfe & Mansfield Alternative Investments II Corp (2008) 45 CBR (5th) 163 and accepted by the US Bankruptcy Court Re Metcalfe & Mansfield Alternative Investments, 421 BR 685, 692–693 (Bankr, SD NY, 2010).

  131. 131.

    Re Metcalfe & Mansfield Alternative Investments, 421 BR 685, 697–700 (Bankr, SD NY, 2010).

  132. 132.

    Re British American Insurance Co Ltd, 488 BR 205 (Bankr, SD Fla, 2013).

  133. 133.

    Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Compudigm International Limited (in liq) [2010] NZCCLR 6 [44].

  134. 134.

    See, e.g. Re Kemsley, 489 BR 346 (Bankr, SD NY, 2013); Kemsley v Barclays Bank PLC [2013] BPIR 839; [2013] EWHC 1274 (Ch) (15 May 2013).

  135. 135.

    Belmont Park Investments Pty Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd [2012] 1 AC 383, 404, [35].

  136. 136.

    Perpetual Trustee Company Limited v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Limited [2010] Ch 347.

  137. 137.

    Belmont Park Investments Pty Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd [2012] 1 AC 383.

  138. 138.

    Re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, 422 BR 407 (Bankr, SD NY, 2010).

  139. 139.

    Ibid, 416-7.

  140. 140.

    Re Condor Insurance Ltd (in liq), 601 F.3d 319, 324 (5th Cir, 2010).

  141. 141.

    Maxwell Communications Corporation v Societe Generale, 93 F.3d 1036 (2nd Cir,1996).

  142. 142.

    Re Northland Services Pty Ltd (1978) 18 ALR 684.

  143. 143.

    Permanent Trustee Company (Canberra) Ltd v Finlayson (1968) 122 CLR 338, 342-43.

  144. 144.

    Kumkang Valve Manufacturing Co Ltd v Enterprise Products Operating LLC

  145. 145.

    Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 ss 168.1, 172; Insolvency Act 2006 s 304; Insolvency Act 1986 c45 ss 260, 281; 11 USC § 524 (2012).

  146. 146.

    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 444H.

  147. 147.

    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 444D.

  148. 148.

    Companies Creditors Arrangement Act 1985, RSC 1985, c C-36 s 36; Companies Act 1993 ss 239ACS, 239ACT; Insolvency Act 1986 c45 ss 37, 260; 11 USC § 1141.

  149. 149.

    See, e.g. Roberts v Picture Butte Municipal Hospital [1999] 4 WWR 443; 449-50, 451 [23, 31]; Re Matlack Inc (2001) CanLII 28467 (ON SC) (19 July 2001).

  150. 150.

    New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency v Morrison (1898) AC 349, 357-8.

  151. 151.

    Sheldon, see footnote 146, 467 [13.5].

  152. 152.

    Ibid, 476 [13.22].

  153. 153.

    Jay Lawrence Westbrook, ‘Chapter 15 and Discharge’, (2005) 13 American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review 503, 513.

  154. 154.

    United States of America Constitution, art VI § 2.

  155. 155.

    See, Dietrich v R (1992) 177 CLR 292, 305.

  156. 156.

    11 USC § 1503 (2012).

  157. 157.

    The American Law Institute see footnote 30.

  158. 158.

    Ibid, Annexure B.

  159. 159.

    International Institute for the Unification of Private Law, ‘Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matter Specific to Aircraft Equipment’ Cape Town (16 November 2001), Art 1 (2)(n).

  160. 160.

    ‘Luxembourg Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters Specific to Railway Rolling Stock’, (opened for signature 23 February 2007 International Institute for the Unification of Private Law Art 1(2)(d).

  161. 161.

    Regulation EC No 1346/2000 of the European Council on Insolvency Proceedings [2000] OJ L 160/1, Art 3(2).

  162. 162.

    Justice Steven Rares, ‘Admiralty Law- The Flying Dutchman of Cross-Border Insolvency’ [2009] Federal Judicial Scholarship 22.

  163. 163.

    Ibid, [31].

  164. 164.

    Ibid, [49], citing Re Aro Ltd [1980] Ch 196, 204, 229.

  165. 165.

    Ibid, [53].

  166. 166.

    Ibid, [63]; Kim v Deabo International Shipping Co Ltd [2015] FCA 684 (8 May 2015) [14].

  167. 167.

    Yu v STX Pan Ocean Co Ltd (South Korea) (2013) 23 FCR 189, 202-3 [41].

  168. 168.

    Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s5; Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 51A, 51F.

  169. 169.

    Yakushiji v Daiichi Chuo Kisen Kaisha [2015] FCA 1170 (2 November 2015).

  170. 170.

    Suk v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd [2016] FCA 1404 (23 November 2016).

  171. 171.

    The Ship “Sam Hawk” v Reiter Petroleum Inc [2016] FCAFC 26 (28 September 2016).

  172. 172.

    Board of Directors of Rizzo-Bottiglieri-De Carlini Armatori SpA v Rizzo-Bottiglieri-De Carlini Armatori SpA [2017] FCA 331 (3 February 2017) [31].

  173. 173.

    See Kim v SW Shipping Co Ltd (2016) 113 ACSR 260; Suk v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd [2016] FCA 1404 (23 November 2016).

  174. 174.

    Re Amanda Shipping SA [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 481.

  175. 175.

    Hague Conference on Private International Law, Convention on Choice of Courts Agreement, opened for signature 30 June 2005, [2005] UKTS 14169 (entered into force 1 October 2005).

  176. 176.

    The signature States are the European Union, Mexico and the United States of America, http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.status&cid=98.

  177. 177.

    Art 2(2)(e); Art 6(c).

  178. 178.

    See Keri Bruce, ‘The Hague on Choice of Court Agreements: Is the Public Policy Exception Helping Click-Away the Security of Non-Negotiated Agreements?’ (2007) 32 Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 1103.

  179. 179.

    Re Rivkin [2009] BusLR 500; [2008] EWHC 2609 (29 October 2008) [18].

  180. 180.

    Norden v Samsun Logix Corporation [2009] BPIR 1367; [2009] EWHC 2304 (Ch) (12 March 2009).

  181. 181.

    McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869, 896-7, [79–81].

  182. 182.

    Re Swissair Schweizerische Luftverkehr-Aktiengesellschaft [2010] BCC 667, 672 [14]-[15]; SNP Boat Service S.A. V Hotel Le St James 483 BR 776 (Dist, SD Fla, 2012).

  183. 183.

    SNP Boat Service S.A. V Hotel Le St James, 483 BR 776 (Dist, SD Fla, 2012).

  184. 184.

    349 BR 627, 637 (Bankr, ED Cal, 2006).

  185. 185.

    Re Board of Directors of Telecom Argentina, 528 F. 3d 162, 170 (2nd Cir, 2008).

  186. 186.

    Ibid, 173.

  187. 187.

    Re International Banking Corporation B.S.C 439 BR 614, 627-9 (Bankr, SD NY 2010).

  188. 188.

    Ibid, 627.

  189. 189.

    Westbrook, ‘Breaking Away: Local Priorities and Global Assets’ see footnote 2, 603-15.

  190. 190.

    See McGrath v Riddell [2008] 3 All ER 869.

  191. 191.

    See 11 USC §§ 1507, 1509 (2012).

  192. 192.

    See comments above in Chap. 8 in respect of linkages between comity and the Model Law.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Honorary Fellow, University of Western Australia and Partner, Thomson Geer, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Neil Hannan B.Ec, LLB (Monash) Ph.D (UWA)

Authors
  1. Neil Hannan B.Ec, LLB (Monash) Ph.D (UWA)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neil Hannan B.Ec, LLB (Monash) Ph.D (UWA) .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hannan, N. (2017). Conflict of Laws. In: Cross-Border Insolvency. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5876-9_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5876-9_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5875-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5876-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation