3rd Conference of the Judicial Insolvency Network on 5 April 2019

The Judicial Insolvency Network (“JIN”) met in Singapore on 5 April 2019. This was the 3^rd conference of the JIN, following the 1st conference also in Singapore on 10 and 11 October 2016 and the 2nd conference in New York City on 22 and 23 September 2018.

The conference discussed the four projects which the JIN initiated at the 2nd conference. They relate to: (i) core principles on recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings and judgments; (ii) modalities of court-to-court communication; (iii) guidelines when maritime law and insolvency law intersect, especially the arrest of ships and Articles 19, 20 and 21 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency; and (iv) identification of insolvency disputes which parties should consider sending for alternative dispute resolution.

Members of the JIN who attended the conference comprised judges from the following courts:

   (i) the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York;
   (ii) the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware;
   (iii) the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands;
   (iv) the Supreme Court of Bermuda;
   (v) the Court of Appeal of England and Wales;
   (vi) the Federal Court of Australia;
   (vii) the Supreme Court of New South Wales;
   (viii) the Seoul Bankruptcy Court; and
   (ix) the Supreme Court of Singapore.

The four projects have made progress. In particular, there was detailed discussion on the modalities of court-to-court communication in insolvency proceedings resulting in a draft being prepared for circulation to the various JIN members for comment (the “Modalities”). Unlike the Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters (the “JIN Guidelines”) issued by the JIN in October 2016, which focus on the principles governing how courts should communicate with one another, the Modalities focus on the mechanics of court-to-court communication. These include how a court may initiate communication with another court, the arrangements as to time, method and language of communication, and the designation of a facilitator for this purpose. Akin to a checklist, the Modalities seek to distil the basic administrative issues a court may wish to address in advance in relation to court-to-court communication, bearing in mind the time, language and cultural differences that may underpin much of cross-border communication. It is expected that the JIN will issue the Modalities later this year. The JIN hopes that the Modalities will receive the same positive reception as the JIN Guidelines have.

Members at this JIN meeting also welcomed the adoption of the JIN Guidelines by the District Court Midden-Nederland (the Netherlands), which is the second European court to adopt the JIN Guidelines. The Chancery Division of the High Court of England & Wales adopted the JIN Guidelines on 5 May 2017.