Corporate insolvency resolution process amended with expanded disclosure, guarantor asset transfer rules, and new dissolution and restoration procedur...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2621 to 2640 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The insolvency admission was upheld because the corporate debtor could not reopen the validity of bank guarantee invocation after the DRT had already found that the guarantees were invoked before expiry and that finding had attained finality. The tribunal also treated the later one time settlement as a formal acknowledgment of the outstanding debt, and the debtor's failure to comply with that settlement constituted default. In view of the admitted sanction of the credit facility, execution of the corporate guarantee and mortgage, and remittance by the bank on invocation, the challenge to admission was untenable and the insolvency application remained valid.
The insolvency admission was upheld because the corporate debtor could not reopen the validity of bank guarantee invocation after the DRT had already found that the guarantees were invoked before expiry and that finding had attained finality. The tribunal also treated the later one time settlement as a formal acknowledgment of the outstanding debt, and the debtor's failure to comply with that settlement constituted default. In view of the admitted sanction of the credit facility, execution of the corporate guarantee and mortgage, and remittance by the bank on invocation, the challenge to admission was untenable and the insolvency application remained valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
