New rules on cross-border assistance in HK, mainland bankruptcy
Authors: Zhang Guanglei / Cai Xiaoxia
(This article was first published on China Business Law Journal column "Cross-border dispute resolution", authorised reprint)
Recently, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) and the government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region signed the Minutes on Mutual Recognition and Assistance of Bankruptcy Proceedings by the Courts of the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The SPC subsequently issued the Opinions on the Pilot Project of Recognition and Assistance of Bankruptcy Proceedings in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, which made specific provisions on the recognition and assistance of bankruptcy proceedings in Hong Kong by the mainland courts.
Before these new regulations, the only principal regulations on cross-border judicial assistance in bankruptcy proceedings were found in article 5 of the Enterprises Bankruptcy Law.
While clarifying that the effect of mainland bankruptcy proceedings extends to the debtor’s extraterritorial property, article 5 provides that mainland courts shall review whether to recognise and enforce judgments and rulings made by overseas courts in bankruptcy cases according to international treaties or the principle of reciprocity.
The SPC clearly pointed out, in its No. 19 reply letter in the case of Min Si Ta Zi (2011), that that article was a provision on the recognition and enforcement of judgments made by overseas courts and did not apply to winding-up orders of Hong Kong.
Further, there was no legal basis for mainland courts to recognise winding-up orders made by Hong Kong courts. Although there are individual cases of Hong Kong courts recognising and assisting mainland bankruptcy proceedings – for example, the bankruptcy of Guangdong International Trust and Investment Co in 2001, the bankruptcy of CEFC Shanghai International Group in 2019, and the bankruptcy of Shenzhen Everich Supply Chain in 2020 – no mainland court has to date provided recognition and assistance to Hong Kong bankruptcy proceedings.
The introduction of the minutes and opinions filled the legal gap in terms of judicial assistance in bankruptcy proceedings between the two places. It also provided a clear normative basis as well as practical guidelines for mainland courts to recognise and assist in Hong Kong bankruptcy proceedings.
So, what are the key points of the new regulations?
The pilot areas and courts of jurisdiction
The minutes and opinions specify that the mainland adopts a pilot approach and designates the Intermediate People’s Courts of Shanghai, Xiamen and Shenzhen as pilot courts to recognise and assist bankruptcy proceedings in Hong Kong. The pilot court has jurisdiction on the premise that the pilot region is the location of the debtor’s principal property, place of business or representative office.
The scope of application
First, the bankruptcy proceedings in Hong Kong should be against companies, including compulsory liquidation, voluntary liquidation of creditors of companies, and reorganisation of debts of companies initiated by liquidators, or provisional liquidators and approved by the High Court of Hong Kong under section 673 of the Companies Ordinance, rather than personal bankruptcy proceedings against natural persons.
Second, the nature of the proceedings in Hong Kong should be “collective liquidation proceedings”, rather than individual or partial creditors’ individual applications for enforcement.
Regarding the scope of the debtor, the debtor in a recognised and assisted Hong Kong bankruptcy proceeding should have had its centre of main interests in Hong Kong for at least six months at the time of application. In determining the centre of main interests, the place of registration is presumed to be the centre of main interests in the first place, while the location of the principal office, the principal place of business and the location of the principal property should also be considered.
The protection of creditors’ interests and interim remedies
Unlike mainland bankruptcy cases, which are only announced and notified to creditors after the ruling of acceptance, the opinions provide that the court shall notify creditors and other interested parties and announce within five days from the date of receipt of the application for recognition and assistance in bankruptcy proceedings in Hong Kong, and give interested parties the right to object and hearings. To prevent individual enforcement of the debtor’s property by creditors, the opinions specifically provide that the court may, upon receipt of the application for recognition and assistance, and before making a ruling, take measures to preserve property on the application of the Hong Kong administrator.
Clarification of the legal effect
The opinions provide that the recognition of the Hong Kong bankruptcy proceedings by the mainland courts will have effects similar to those of the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings in the mainland, including the invalidation of the debtor’s discharge to individual creditors, the suspension of any pending civil litigation or arbitration concerning the debtor, the lifting of preservation measures concerning the debtor’s property, and the suspension of enforcement proceedings.
However, the opinions do not provide for the retroactive effect after the recognition of bankruptcy proceedings in Hong Kong, i.e., they do not include the bankruptcy revocation regime, which aims to maintain the stability of the order of mainland transactions and the expectations of parties to mainland transactions.
The manner of assistance
The opinions provide for two ways of assisting Hong Kong bankruptcy proceedings. First, they allow Hong Kong administrators to perform their duties in the mainland upon application. The opinions set out the scope of duties of the Hong Kong administrator and give discretionary power to the mainland court.
It is stipulated that the scope of duties of the Hong Kong administrator shall not exceed the intersection of the laws of the two places, and for major matters such as waiver of property interests, creating security over security, borrowing, transferring property out of the mainland, etc., separate approval from the mainland court is required.
Second, in terms of the appointment of a mainland administrator to perform its duties upon application, the opinions provide that the mainland administrator shall handle the debtor’s affairs and property in the mainland according to the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, and that the administrators of the two places shall strengthen communication and co-operation. However, there are no provisions on the co-ordination between the administrators of the two places, which will be further explored in future practice.
Rules for the distribution of the bankruptcy estate
The opinions provide that the debtor’s estate on the mainland shall be used first to satisfy claims that have priority under mainland law, and the remaining property shall be distributed according to Hong Kong bankruptcy procedures on the premise that creditors of the same class are treated equally.
2. 简评跨境金融纠纷管辖新规
3. New jurisdiction regulations for cross-border financial disputes
5. Serving litigation documents abroad effectively
6. 裁决被申请人向合同第三人履行债务是否构成“超裁”？——以一宗仲裁案件为视角
7. 有哪些坚守又有哪些革新？——最高法院《民法典会议纪要》商事裁判规则解读
8. Arbitration and Insolvency Proceedings: Chinese Law Perspective
10. Clarity obligations of standardised clauses under Civil Code
11. “不方便法院”原则的司法实践
12. The Judicial practice of forum non conveniens
13. 新证据规定下的域外公文书证
14. New provisions on extraterritorial public documentary evidence
16. Applying New York Convention’s ‘public policy’ clause in China
17. 从最高院司法判例看股东代表诉讼在公司强制清算程序中的适用原则
18. 登记对跨境担保合同效力的影响
19. Document No.29 and the validity of cross-border guarantees
20. 旧文新推 | 论外国仲裁机构在中国大陆境内仲裁的程序法
24. 中国司法实践中的境外法查明
25. Ascertainment of foreign law in Chinese judicial practice
26. 争议解决条款重点问题（二）——涉外合同中的争议管辖条款
28. 争议解决条款重点问题（一）——涉外合同中的法律适用条款
29. 回顾外滩地王案——股东优先购买权规范穿透适用的斟酌因素
31. 违约与侵权竞合对争议管辖的影响 ——以必要共同诉讼为主要视角
32. 法人人格否认的实务观察
33. 刍议仲裁和解裁决书和调解书的异同
34. 目标公司回购投资人股权的合同条款效力是否迎来确定结论？——简评最高院第96号指导案例
37. 仲裁 | 国际仲裁协议的形式要件
合伙人
010-5809 1515
zhang.guanglei@jingtian.com
张光磊律师毕业于中国政法大学，获法学学士、民法学硕士和商法学博士学位。此外，获美国乔治华盛顿大学法学硕士学位，为哥伦比亚大学法学院访问学者。张律师拥有中国及美国纽约州律师资格，为香港国际仲裁中心和上海国际仲裁中心等仲裁机构在册仲裁员，中国政法大学法律硕士学院和对外经济贸易大学法学院兼职导师。
张律师的主要业务领域为争议解决，在民商事诉讼、仲裁、调解等领域拥有丰富的经验和良好的声誉，于2018年被CLECSS评选为“中国十大杰出青年律师”，于2020年被《商法》（CBLJ）评选为“A-List法律精英100强”，于2021年被《亚洲法律杂志》（ALB）评选为“中国十五佳诉讼律师”。在香港国际仲裁中心主办的2019国际仲裁中文赛中，张律师带领竞天公诚律师事务所获得北京赛区冠军和全国亚军，其个人在所有场次比赛中均被评为最佳律师。
张律师曾代表境内外客户处理中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会及其分会、北京仲裁委员会、上海国际仲裁中心、深圳国际仲裁院、珠海国际仲裁院、香港国际仲裁中心、国际商会国际仲裁院等仲裁机构及中国不同层级法院的数百宗民商事案件，涉及行业领域包括房地产、金融、证券、国际贸易、医药、融资租赁、环保、文旅、教育、电信、征信、互联网、工业制造等。
张律师特别擅长处理投融资领域的争议，曾为客户成功处理业绩对赌、股权转让、公司控制权、董事和高管责任、员工股权激励、基金募集管理等投融资领域的多种争议。张律师也擅长在跨境交易纠纷中为客户制定整体解决方案，并多次在美国、新加坡、香港等地的诉讼和仲裁程序中担任中国法顾问及专家证人。
张光磊律师历史文章
1. 简评跨境金融纠纷管辖新规
2. New jurisdiction regulations for cross-border financial disputes4. Serving litigation documents abroad effectively
7. The Judicial practice of forum non convenien
9. New provisions on extraterritorial public documentary evidence
11. Applying New York Convention’s ‘public policy’ clause in China
12. 登记对跨境担保合同效力的影响
13. Document No.29 and the validity of cross-border guarantees
14. 中国司法实践中的境外法查明
15. Ascertainment of foreign law in Chinese judicial practice
16. 争议解决条款重点问题（二）——涉外合同中的争议管辖条款
18. 争议解决条款重点问题（一）——涉外合同中的法律适用条款
20. 回顾外滩地王案——股东优先购买权规范穿透适用的斟酌因素
21. 违约与侵权竞合对争议管辖的影响 ——以必要共同诉讼为主要视角
22. 法人人格否认的实务观察
律师
010-5809 1243
cai.xiaoxia@jingtian.com
蔡晓霞律师毕业于中国政法大学和美国北卡罗莱纳大学，分别获得法学学士和法学硕士学位，拥有中国律师执业资格。蔡律师的执业领域为争议解决，曾代表境内外客户处理过数十宗民商事诉讼仲裁案件，并曾为多家知名企业提供常年和专项法律服务。
蔡晓霞律师历史文章
4. The Judicial practice of forum non conveniens
5. 争议解决条款重点问题（一）——涉外合同中的法律适用条款6. Ascertainment of foreign law in Chinese judicial practice