<scp>Cross‐border</scp> insolvency law in Hong Kong: Recognition of foreign schemes of arrangement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hong Kong has no statutory cross‐border insolvency regime. Hong Kong courts have to resort to common law principles in circumstances where they are requested to recognise foreign insolvency proceedings and grant assistance. The nature and scope of these principles have been the subject of extensive debate in common law jurisdictions. In Re CW Advanced Technologies Ltd [2018] HKCFI 1705, Harris J identified the uncertainties associated with the common law position in Hong Kong. These uncertainties include whether a Hong Kong court may recognise a Singapore moratorium granted to facilitate a scheme of arrangement and, if so, whether the court may grant recognition where Singapore (i.e., the foreign jurisdiction) is not the country of incorporation. Harris J also noted the ‘urgent need to enact a statutory cross‐border insolvency regime’. This article examines the scope of the common law powers in Hong Kong and seeks to clarify the possibility for members within a corporate group located outside Singapore, where the holding company has its centre of main interests in Singapore or is otherwise eligible to use the Singapore scheme regime, to obtain recognition and assistance in Hong Kong.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".