We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Just to correct it’s well over a $1bn...! Gla
Not long to go....
JPL not priced in. Look forward to rerate on JPL this afternoon.
3GE assets worth $1 billion.
Correction last post first para..(new phone!)
‘ As per my posts last night on the extract of Cayman Island law, it would be WITHIN the law to authorise company’s request for JPL. ’
As per my posts last night on the extract of Cayman Island law, it would be against the law to authorise company’s request for JPL.
The Nordic request for JOL actually appears incorrect and I’ll-advised, this is because JPL should be applied for at the first instance as per CI law which then leads to JOL, but they’ve tried to jumo this step which appears naughty and against the law as I see it.
Actually the opposite, it should be straightforward, as per their laws (see extract) JPL is step 1, JOL step 2..
Duh meant ‘secure’
Note key extract, which I believe means G3E are odds on to seduce JPL by Cayman Island law:
‘If a company restructuring is proposed, existing management can be allowed to remain in control of the company subject to the supervision of the court and provisional liquidators.’
Just been reading myself. Looks like it could be a long process. Not expecting any outcomes tomorrow personally.
Part 2 cont>
Provisional liquidation can therefore be lengthy. If the purpose is to protect the assets of the company pending the hearing of the winding-up petition, the provisional liquidation is likely to be relatively brief.
Conclusion. Provisional liquidation is brought to an end by court order. This is usually as a result of either:
The winding-up order being made (in which case the company is dissolved at the conclusion of the liquidation).
An order dismissing or withdrawing the winding-up petition (in which case the company continues to exist).
The court can also order an earlier termination of the provisional liquidator's appointment either:
On application by the provisional liquidator, the petitioner, the company, a creditor or a shareholder.
If an appeal is lodged against the provisional liquidator, the petitioner, the company, a creditor or a shareholder.
If an appeal against the provisional liquidator's appointment succeeds.
Reading below law on JPL application, one would agree that the company meet the conditions for it, and will therefore be granted JPL:
Provisional liquidation
Objective. The purpose is usually to preserve and protect the company's assets until the hearing of a winding-up petition and the appointment of official liquidators.
Initiation. Section 104 of the Companies Law governs the appointment and powers of a provisional liquidator, who may be appointed by the court at any time after the presentation of a winding up petition but before the making of a winding-up order. In order for a company to make an application under section 104(3) of the Companies Law, the company must establish that it is, or is likely to become, insolvent. Once an application has been made under section 104(3), the company benefits from the statutory moratorium on proceedings being continued or commenced against it, during which time it can formulate and promote a scheme under section 86 of the Companies Law (or some other creditor arrangement).
Substantive tests. At present, section 104(3) only provides for an application for the appointment of a provisional liquidator to be made by the company itself and does not confer the same benefit on creditors, contributories or the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA). While creditors, contributories and the CIMA can apply for the appointment of provisional liquidators under section 104(2) of the Companies Law, they must, under that provision, also demonstrate that there is a prima facie case to wind up the company and that the appointment is necessary to prevent:
The dissipation of assets.
Oppression of minority shareholders.
Mismanagement or misconduct by the company's directors.
Consent and approvals. Provisional liquidators are appointed by the court and the consent of stakeholders is not required.
Supervision and control. Provisional liquidators are appointed. They are subject to the court's supervision and only carry out the functions that the court confers on them. Their powers may be limited by the order appointing them, and the scope of their powers depends on the reason for their appointment. If a company restructuring is proposed, existing management can be allowed to remain in control of the company subject to the supervision of the court and provisional liquidators.
Protection from creditors. On the appointment of a provisional liquidator, no suit, action or other proceeding can be continued or commenced against the company without the court's leave. This automatic stay does not prohibit secured creditors from enforcing their security. There are no statutory implications relating to existing intellectual property licences.
Length of procedure. If the purpose of a provisional liquidation is to enable a restructuring of the company's affairs, the hearing of the winding-up petition for a fixed period (which can be extended if necessary) is usually adjourned to provide sufficient time to achieve this. Cont>