前言
随着经济全球化的深入发展，跨境破产协助日益成为国际、区际司法合作中的重要内容。从破产实践角度，越来越多的破产案件需要有跨境破产的考量及适用。了解不同区域的破产制度，对于破产案件的处理具有积极意义。大成全球不同区域都有专业的破产团队，大成全球重组、资不抵债及破产团队也会定期举行会议，探讨不同区域破产的情况及动向，为破产业务提供支持。基于此，我们与不同区域破产团队合作，对应梳理介绍各自破产业务的基本情况与适用，分享给大家，欢迎大家交流指正。
近年来，特别是在粤港澳大湾区和深圳先行示范区建设中，两地互涉投资不断增多、企业在两地均有资产和负债的情况也越来越多，实务中的适用需求也比较突出。5月14日上午，最高人民法院和香港特别行政区政府在深圳签署《关于内地与香港特别行政区法院相互认可和协助破产程序的会谈纪要》，以试点方式迈出了跨境破产协助实质性、跨越性的一步。本文拟概述内地与香港破产程序，介绍内地与香港破产程序的基本适用与主要路径。
内地破产程序概述
一、企业破产法概述
《中华人民共和国企业破产法》（以下简称《企业破产法》）由中华人民共和国第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十三次会议于2006年8月27日通过，自2007年6月1日起施行。企业破产适用企业破产法律体系，包括《企业破产法》及相关配套司法解释、各地法院或破产法庭发布的地方性司法文件以及其他与破产相关的规范性文件，例如最高人民法院制定的《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国企业破产法〉若干问题的规定(一)》（以下简称《破产法司法解释（一）》）《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国企业破产法〉若干问题的规定(二)》《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国企业破产法〉若干问题的规定(三)》、北京破产法庭制定的《北京破产法庭破产案件管理人工作指引（试行）》、国家发展改革委等十三部门制定的《加快完善市场主体退出制度改革方案》等。
破产程序是指企业法人不能清偿到期债务，并且资产不足以清偿全部债务或者明显缺乏清偿能力、有明显丧失清偿能力可能的，依照破产相关规范性文件进行破产重整、破产清算、破产和解程序的总称，破产法是兼有程序法和实体法双重性质的综合性法律。
二、破产申请条件
《企业破产法》“第二条 企业法人不能清偿到期债务，并且资产不足以清偿全部债务或者明显缺乏清偿能力的，依照本法规定清理债务。
企业法人有前款规定情形，或者有明显丧失清偿能力可能的，可以依照本法规定进行重整。”
关于前述条款中“不能清偿到期债务”的界定，2011年最高院发布的《破产法司法解释（一）》第二条明确了，当下列情形同时存在的，人民法院应当认定债务人不能清偿到期债务：（一）债权债务关系依法成立；（二）债务履行期限已经届满；（三）债务人未完全清偿债务。
最高院在《破产法司法解释（一）》中，对于“资产不足以清偿全部债务”的界定为债务人的资产负债表，或者审计报告、资产评估报告等显示其全部资产不足以偿付全部负债。
同时，最高院对于“明显缺乏清偿能力”也做了明确规定，应为：债务人账面资产虽大于负债，但存在下列情形之一：（一）因资金严重不足或者财产不能变现等原因，无法清偿债务；（二）法定代表人下落不明且无其他人员负责管理财产,无法清偿债务；（三）经人民法院强制执行,无法清偿债务；（四）长期亏损且经营扭亏困难,无法清偿债务；（五）导致债务人丧失清偿能力的其他情形。
根据《企业破产法》第七条，债务人有《企业破产法》第二条规定的情形，可以向人民法院提出重整、和解或者破产清算申请；债务人不能清偿到期债务，债权人可以向人民法院提出对债务人进行重整或者破产清算的申请；企业法人已解散但未清算或者未清算完毕，资产不足以清偿债务的，依法负有清算责任的人应当向人民法院申请破产清算。 
三、破产清算、重整与破产和解
现阶段破产法体系主要包括三种企业救助方式，分别为破产清算、重整及和解。
破产清算
破产清算是指公司被人民法院依法宣布破产后，由管理人对公司的财产进行清理，将破产财产依法分配给债权人，并最终消灭企业法人资格的法定程序。破产清算由法院依照《企业破产法》的规定执行。
破产清算程序中，管理人应当就破产财产的分配拟定分配方案，在债权人会上审议通过（财产分配方案由出席会议的有表决权的债权人过半数通过，并且其所代表的债权额占无财产担保债权总额的二分之一以上），报人民法院裁定批准后由管理人具体执行。破产财产的分配方案经债权人会议二次表决仍未通过的，由人民法院裁定。
破产财产在优先清偿破产费用及共益债务后，依照下列顺序清偿：（一）破产人所欠职工的工资和医疗、伤残补助、抚恤费用，所欠的应当划入职工个人账户的基本养老保险、基本医疗保险费用，以及法律、行政法规规定应当支付给职工的补偿金；（二）破产人欠缴的除前项规定以外的社会保险费用和破产人所欠税款；（三）普通破产债权。
破产财产分配完毕后，应由管理人向人民法院提交破产财产分配报告，并提请人民法院裁定终结破产程序。管理人应当自破产程序终结之日起十日内，持人民法院终结破产程序的裁定，向破产人的原登记机关办理注销登记，依法终止企业法人的民事行为能力。
破产重整
重整是指对于具备法定条件的债务人，根据相关主体的申请，经人民法院审查，裁定对债务人进行生产经营上的整顿和债权债务关系上的清理，以期摆脱财务困境，重获生产经营能力的法律程序。重整是人民法院受理破产案件的一种司法程序，由人民法院主导，具有严格的司法程序性。
按照《破产法》第七十条规定，债权人和债务人都可以向人民法院申请对债务人进行重整。如果债权人提出破产清算，在法院受理破产申请后、宣告债务人破产前，债务人或者出资额占债务人注册资本十分之一以上的出资人，可以向法院申请重整。由法院裁定债务人进行重整，并公告。
人民法院裁定债务人重整之日起6个月内，债务人或管理人应当向人民法院和债权人会议提交重整计划草案。其中符合条件的，经批准，可以延长三个月。
人民法院应当自收到重整计划草案之日起三十日内召开债权人会议，并按照债权是否有担保权；是否为所欠职工的工资、医疗、保险等；是否为所欠税款的等对债权进行分类，分组对重整计划草案进行表决。出席会议的同一表决组的债权人过半数同意重整计划草案，并且其所代表的债权额占该组债权总额的三分之二以上的，即为该组通过重整计划草案。部分表决组未通过重整计划草案的，债务人或者管理人可以同未通过重整计划草案的表决组协商。该表决组可以在协商后再表决一次。双方协商的结果不得损害其他表决组的利益。未通过重整计划草案的表决组拒绝再次表决或者再次表决仍未通过重整计划草案，但重整计划草案符合《企业破产法》第八十七条中所列示的满足条件的，债务人或者管理人可以申请人民法院批准重整计划草案。满足条件具体如下：（一）按照重整计划草案，本法第八十二条第一款第一项所列债权就该特定财产将获得全额清偿，其因延期清偿所受的损失将得到公平补偿，并且其担保权未受到实质性损害，或者该表决组已经通过重整计划草案；（二）按照重整计划草案，本法第八十二条第一款第二项、第三项所列债权将获得全额清偿，或者相应表决组已经通过重整计划草案；（三）按照重整计划草案，普通债权所获得的清偿比例，不低于其在重整计划草案被提请批准时依照破产清算程序所能获得的清偿比例，或者该表决组已经通过重整计划草案；（四）重整计划草案对出资人权益的调整公平、公正，或者出资人组已经通过重整计划草案；（五）重整计划草案公平对待同一表决组的成员，并且所规定的债权清偿顺序不违反本法第一百一十三条的规定；（六）债务人的经营方案具有可行性。人民法院经审查认为重整计划草案符合前款规定的，应当自收到申请之日起三十日内裁定批准，终止重整程序，并予以公告。
破产和解
债务人可以依照《企业破产法》规定，直接向人民法院申请和解；也可以在人民法院受理破产申请后、宣告债务人破产前，向人民法院申请和解。债务人申请和解，应当提出和解协议草案。
经人民法院审查认为和解申请符合《企业破产法》规定的，应当裁定和解，予以公告，并召集债权人会议讨论和解协议草案。
当出席会议的有表决权的债权人过半数同意和解协议，并且其所代表的债权额占无财产担保债权总额的三分之二以上时，和解协议通过，经人民法院认可后，和解协议对债务人和全体债权人均有约束力。债务人应当按照和解协议规定的条件清偿债务。
和解与重整的区别
和解与重整存在不同，申请主体方面，破产重整的申请主体包括债权人、债务人、占债务人注册资本十分之一以上的出资人（股东）；破产和解的申请主体为债务人；另外，破产重整程序中担保物权暂停行使，破产和解程序中担保物权不暂停行使等。
上述三种程序之间，即重整、清算、和解在适用中存在转换关系。在重整程序中，在因债务人自身原因（如债务人的经营状况和财产状况继续恶化缺乏挽救的可能性等）、法定期限内未提交重整计划草案、重整计划草案未获批准等情况下，重整程序可能转化为清算程序；在和解程序中，在和解协议未通过或通过但未获法院认可、和解协议无效、债务人不能执行或者不执行和解协议等情况下，和解程序可能转化为清算程序；在清算程序中，在人民法院已经受理破产申请但人民法院尚未对债务人作出宣告破产的裁定时且债务人具有继续经营存续的价值与可行性时，清算程序可能转化为重整程序或者和解程序；等。
香港破产程序概述
根据香港法律，“资不抵债（insolvency）”“清算（liquidation）”或“清盘（winding-up）”一词用于指公司，而“破产（bankruptcy）”则是指与个人有关的破产程序。前者主要受《公司（清盘及杂项条文）条例》（第32章）监管，而后者则受《破产条例》（第六章）监管。以下条款侧重于公司破产制度，涉及财务发生困难、无法偿还债务或无法履行付款义务的公司。
公司破产法的根本目的是解决针对破产公司的所有索偿，并提供一个公平和有序的程序来收集整合和变现破产公司的资产，使其能够按照法定的分配方案在债权人之间分配。
目前，法律框架通过（1）法定债务重组计划（称为“安排计划”）和（2）正式清算/清盘程序，向陷入财务困境的企业提供援助。
方案1：不进行清盘的重组
债务重组是指公司在不进行清算或解散的情况下重组其债务的过程。它可以是非法定的和/或法定的。非法定解决方案是债务人公司与其债权人之间自由达成的庭外安排，受普通法合同项下规则管辖。法定债务偿还安排是根据《公司（清盘）及杂项规定条例》（“清盘条例”）（第三十二章）的规定，经法院认许的妥协，对债务人公司的所有债权人具有约束力，即使并非所有债权人都同意该安排。法定计划可以单独使用，也可以与非法定计划结合使用。债权人可以首先尝试在他们之间协商并达成一个解决办法，如果无法达成一致意见，则占多数的债权人可向法院申请批准其提起的债务偿还安排。
在许多情况下，债务重组优先于清盘，因为债权人的潜在回报率通常更高。然而，债务重组并非没有反对者，他们经常指出，重组过程可能过于繁琐。由于没有法定延期偿付或搁置程序，持异议的债权人可以在重组计划过程中对公司提出索赔和诉讼（除非法院已经认许了对公司所有债权人具有约束力的法定债务偿还安排），从而阻碍了整个过程的结束。在这种情况下，因为在清盘程序中存在延期偿付的情况，因此清盘有时被视为一种更好的选择，以便及时处置上述情况。
方案2：正式清算/清盘程序
清算发生在法院指定的清盘人接管一家公司并变现其资产分配的情况下，公司在清算过程结束时解散。在《清盘条例》的规定下，在香港将公司清盘有两条路可供选择：自行清盘或强制清盘。
自动清盘可通过公司在股东大会上就解散公司的决定进行。其可进一步分为公司成员自动清盘和债权人自动清盘。公司成员自动清盘适用于有偿债能力的公司。作为公司偿付能力的证据，董事们必须签署一份“有偿债能力证明书”，表明他们已经对公司事务进行了全面调查，并形成了公司将能够在自动清盘开始之日起不超过12个月的期限内全额偿还债务的意见。另一方面，债权人主动清盘适用于无力偿债的公司，其负债超过可用资产。区分公司成员自动清盘和债权人自动清盘并不困难。缺乏有偿债能力证明书的任何自动清盘程序皆将被视为债权人自动清盘。公司成员主动清盘和债权人主动清盘都需要股东的批准，但由于业务的无力偿债性质，只有后者受到债权人的监督。
相比之下，强制清盘是在法院根据公司债权人提出的呈请命令公司进行清盘。在法院清盘令下发前，债权人必须满足《公司（清盘及杂项条文）条例》中规定的法定申请条件，最常见的理由之一为公司未能支付其债务。与内部发起的自动清盘不同，强制清盘可由债务人公司、股东、破产管理署署长、公司注册登记署署长以及最常见的债权人发起。鉴于法院的参与，它受到更高程度的外部监督和控制。
根据第三十二章《公司（清盘及杂项条文）条例》第一百七十七条，如果法院确信下列理由之一成立时，可对公司发出清盘令：
（1）公司已藉特别决议（要求达到75%的票数），议决公司由法院清盘；
（2） 公司在其成立为法团时起计一年内并无开始营业，或停业一整年；
（3） 公司并无成员；
（4） 公司无能力偿付其债项；
（5） 公司的章程细则订定某事件(如有的话)一旦发生则公司须予解散，而该事件经已发生；或
（6） 法院认为将公司清盘是公正公平的。
公司无能力偿付债项是香港强制清盘的最常见的理由。根据第三十二章《公司（清盘及杂项条文）条例》第一百七十八条，在以下情况出现时，公司被视为无法偿还债务：
（1） 无能力在法定要求偿债书发出起3个星期内偿付不少于港币10000元债务；
（2） 无法履行对公司的部分或全部判决；或
（3） 法院认定该公司无力偿还债务。
如法院认为呈请书中的债项是基于真正而实质存在的争议理由（bona fide and substantial ground of dispute），则法院不会颁发清盘令。
未来方案：企业救助
跟随国际上现行实务操作，香港政府将很快推出期待已久的法定企业救助程序，对一个或可能存在无力偿债情况的公司发起临时监管，从而取得企业救助方案并促进重组工作。企业救助的一个突出特点是进行重组的同时实施法定延期偿付程序。其效果是使企业能够在不进行清算的情况下生存，同时防止债权人提出索赔，从而损害正在进行的救助工作。这种延期偿付或搁置清盘法律程序通常持续45个工作日，经债权人同意可延长至6个月，如属于复杂案件，则经法院许可后可延长至6个月以上。
香港政府于2020年底提交了《公司（企业拯救）条例草案》，连同有关企业拯救程序操作事宜的附属法规，预计将于2021年提交立法会。该政策一旦出台，可能会改变财务陷入困境的企业重组的未来前景，使香港能够保持其作为区域性甚至全球性债务重组中心的地位。
PREAMBLE
With the in-depth development of economic globalization, cross-border bankruptcy assistance has increasingly become an important part of international and interregional judicial cooperation. From the perspective of bankruptcy practice, more and more bankruptcy cases need to consider and apply cross-border bankruptcy. Understanding the bankruptcy legal systems in different regions is of positive significance for the handling of bankruptcy cases nowadays. Dentons has professional bankruptcy teams in different regions of the world. Dentons Global Restructuring Insolvency & Bankruptcy leadership meetings are also held regularly to discuss the situation and trend of bankruptcy in different regions and provide support for regional bankruptcy businesses. Based on this, we worked with bankruptcy teams in different regions to sort out the local business, introduce the basic situation and application of bankruptcy business in different regions. We are here to share it with you, discussion and correction are sincerely welcomed.
In recent years, especially in the construction of Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and Shenzhen Leading Demonstration zone, the mutual investment between Mainland and Hong Kong is increasing, the situation that enterprises have assets and liabilities in both Mainland and Hong Kong is also increasing, and the application demand in practice is also prominent. In the morning of May 14, the Supreme People's Court and the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region signed the ‘Minutes of Talks on Mutual Recognition and Assistance in Bankruptcy Proceedings between the Courts of the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’ in Shenzhen, taking a substantive and leapfrog step in cross-border bankruptcy assistance by a pilot manner. This article will summarize the of bankruptcy proceedings in the Mainland and Hong Kong and introduces the basic application and main path of the bankruptcy proceedings in the Mainland and Hong Kong.
OVERVIEW OF MAINLAND BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS
1
Overview of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law
The Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law) was adopted at the 23rd Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China on August 27, 2006 and enter into force since of June 1, 2007. The legal system applicable to Enterprise Bankruptcy includes the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law and relevant supporting Judicial Interpretations, local regulations issued by local governments and local judicial documents issued by local courts or bankruptcy courts,  such as the provisions of the Provisions (I) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the People's Republic of China, Provisions (II) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the People's Republic of China, Provisions (III) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the People's Republic of China, and Working Guidelines for Bankruptcy Administrators of Beijing Bankruptcy Court (Trial) issued by Beijing Bankruptcy Court in 2020, the reform plan for accelerating the improvement of the enterprise withdrawal system of market players formulated by 13 departments such as the National Development and Reform Commission, etc.
Bankruptcy procedure specifically refers to the general name of bankruptcy reorganization, bankruptcy liquidation and bankruptcy conciliation procedures in accordance with the relevant normative documents of bankruptcy if the enterprise as a legal person is unable to pay off its due debts, and its assets are insufficient to pay off all its debts or it is obviously lack of solvency, or it is possible to lose its solvency. Enterprise Bankruptcy Law is a comprehensive law with the dual nature of procedural law and substantive law.
2
Conditions of bankruptcy application
Article 2 Where an enterprise legal person fails to clear off its debt as due, and if its assets are not enough to pay off all the debts or if it is obviously incapable of clearing off its debts, its liabilities shall be liquidated according to the provisions of the present Law.
Where an enterprise legal person is under the aforesaid circumstance or if it is obviously likely that it is unable to pay off its debts, it may be subject to revival according to the provisions of the present Law.
With regard to the definition of "failures to clear off its debt as due" in the preceding articles, the Provisions (I) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "Enterprise Bankruptcy Judicial Interpretation (I)") issued by the Supreme Court in 2011 article 2 specifies, where all of the following conditions are met, the People's Court shall determine that a debtor is unable to reply a due debt: 1. The debt relationship has been legally established; 2. The time limit for repayment of the debt has expired; and 3. The debtor has not fully repaid the debt.
In Enterprise Bankruptcy Judicial Interpretation (I), the Supreme Court defined " if its assets are not enough to pay off all the debts " as where a debtor's balance sheet or audit report, asset appraisal report and any other such document shows that its total assets are insufficient for repayment of its total debts, the People’s Court shall determine that the debtor has insufficient assets for repaying all its debts
At the same time, the Supreme Court has also made clear provisions on " obviously incapable of clearing off its debts "  in 5 situations: 1. It is unable to repay a debt for serious lack of funds, impossibility to realize its assets or any other reason; 2. It is unable to repay a debt because the whereabouts of its legal representative is unknown and there is no other person in charge of asset management; 3. It is unable to repay a debt even after enforcement by the People's Court; 4. It is unable to repay a debt because it has suffered losses for a long time and has difficulty in making up losses; or 5. any other circumstance which leads to the debtor's insolvency.
According to Article 7 of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, the debtor may apply to the People’s Court for reorganization, reconciliation or bankruptcy liquidation under the circumstances specified in Article 2 of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law; If the debtor is unable to pay off its due debts, the creditor may apply to the People's Court for reorganization or bankruptcy liquidation of the debtor. Where an enterprise as a legal person has been dissolved but has not been liquidated or has not been liquidated yet, and its assets are insufficient to pay off its debts, the person who responsible for liquidation according to law shall apply to the People's Court for bankruptcy liquidation.
3
Bankruptcy Liquidation, Reorganization and Reconciliation
At present, PRC bankruptcy law system mainly includes three ways of enterprise rescue, namely bankruptcy liquidation, reorganization and reconciliation.
Bankruptcy Liquidation
Bankruptcy liquidation refers to the legal procedure in which the enterprise is declared bankrupt by the People's Court according to law, the administrator shall clean up the enterprise's property, distribute the bankruptcy enterprise’s property fairly to the creditors, and finally eliminate the legal personality under provisions. The bankruptcy liquidation shall be carried out under the supervision of the court, and the liquidation shall be carried out under the provisions of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law.
In bankruptcy liquidation proceedings, the administrator shall promptly formulate a distribution plan for the distribution of the bankruptcy property, which shall be deliberated and adopted at the creditors' meeting (the property distribution plan shall be adopted by more than half of the creditors with voting rights present at the meeting, and the amount of creditor's rights represented by it accounts for more than half of the total amount of unsecured creditor's rights), and shall be implemented by the administrator after being submitted to the People's Court for approval. Distribution plan of the insolvent assets has not been adopted after a second voting at the creditors' meeting shall be ruled by the People's Court.
After giving priority to pay off Bankrupt Expenses and Community Liabilities, the bankruptcy property shall pay off in the following order: 1.The wages, subsidies for medical treatment and disability and comfort and compensatory funds as defaulted by the debtor, the fundamental old-age insurance premiums, fundamental medical insurance premiums that shall have been transferred into the individual accounts of employers as well as the compensation for the employees as prescribed by the relevant laws and administrative regulations; 2.The taxes as defaulted by the debtor; and 3.The common creditor's right.
A bankruptcy administrator shall, upon conclusion of a conclusive distribution, report to the People’s Court a report on the distribution of bankruptcy property and request the People’s Court to terminate the procedures for bankruptcy. A bankruptcy administrator shall, within 10 days as of the day when the procedures for bankruptcy are concluded, handle the formalities for write-off in the organ as originally in charge of the registration of the bankrupt upon the strength of the decision of the People’s Court on concluding the procedures for bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy Reorganization
Reorganization refers to a legal procedure in which the debtor with legal conditions, according to the application of the relevant subject and after review by the People’s Court, decides to rectify the debtor's production and operation and clean up between creditor's rights and debts, in order to get rid of financial difficulties and regain production or operation capacity. Reorganization is a judicial procedure for the People’s Court to accept bankruptcy cases. It is dominated by the People’s Court and has strict judicial procedure.
According to Article 70 of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, both creditors and debtors can apply to the People’s Court for debtor’s reorganization. If the creditor proposes bankruptcy liquidation, after the court accepts the bankruptcy liquidation application and before declaring the debtor bankrupt, the debtor or the contributor whose capital contribution accounts for more than one tenth of the debtor's registered capital may apply to the court for reorganization. The court shall order the debtor to reorganize and make a public announcement.
Within 6 months from the date when the People’s Court makes a ruling on the reorganization of the debtor, the debtor or the manager shall submit the draft reorganization plan to the People’s Court and the creditors' meeting. If the conditions are met, it may be extended for three more months upon approval.
The People’s Court shall convene a creditors' meeting within 30 days from the date of receiving the draft reorganization plan and decide whether the creditors have a security right; whether it is the wages debt, medical treatment debt, insurance debt, etc. owed to employees; classify the creditor's rights, such as whether it is the tax owed, and vote on the draft reorganization plan in groups. If more than half of the creditors of the same voting group present at the meeting agree to the draft reorganization plan, and the amount of creditor's rights represented by it accounts for more than two-thirds of the total creditor's rights of the group, the group shall pass the draft reorganization plan. Where some voting groups do not agree to a draft of revival plan, the relevant debtor or bankruptcy administrator may negotiate with the aforesaid voting groups. The latter may vote for one more times upon negotiation. The result of negotiation shall not damage the interest of any other voting group. Where a voting group that does not agree to a draft of revival plan refuses to re-vote or disagrees with the draft of revival plan upon re-voting yet if the draft of revival plan meets the conditions in Article 87 of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law requirements, the relevant debtor or bankruptcy administrator may apply with the People's Court for approving the draft of revival plan. The specific conditions are as follows:1. Where, according to a draft of revival plan, the creditor's right as prescribed in item (1), paragraph 1, Article 82 of the present Law shall be cleared off by means of the particular assets and the losses as incurred from postponed payment shall be compensated for in a fair manner, given that the right to guaranty has not been materially damaged, or the relevant voting groups have adopted the draft of revival plan; 2. Where, according to the draft of revival plan, the creditor's right as prescribed in items (2) and (3) of paragraph 1, Article 82 of the present Law shall be cleared off, or the relevant voting groups have adopted the draft of revival plan; 3. Where, according to the draft of revival plan, the repayment proportion of the common creditor's right shall not be any lower than that as set in the procedures for bankrupt liquidation when the draft of revival plan is submitted for approval, or the relevant contributor group has adopted the draft of revival plan; 4. Where the draft of revival plan can bring a fair and justifiable adjustment to the rights and interests of capital contributors, or the contributor group has adopted the draft of revival plan; 5. Where the draft of revival plan treats the members of a same voting group fairly and the liquidation order of the creditor's right does not violate the provisions of Article 113 of the present Law; 6. Where the debtor's business plan is feasible. Where the People's Court deems that the draft of revival plan complies with the provisions of the preceding paragraph, it shall, within 30 days as of the day when an application is received, approve it, terminate the procedures for revival and announce it.
Bankruptcy Reconciliation
The debtor may, in accordance with the provisions of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, directly apply to the People’s Court for reconciliation, or may apply to the People’s Court for reconciliation after the People’s Court accepts the bankruptcy application and before it declares the debtor bankrupt. When applying for reconciliation, a draft settlement agreement shall be submitted at the same time. 
If the People’s Court considers that the application for reconciliation complies with the provisions of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, it shall rule on reconciliation, make a public announcement, and convene a creditors' meeting to discuss the draft settlement agreement.
When more than half of the voting creditors present at creditor’s meeting agree to the draft settlement agreement, and the amount of the creditor's rights represented by it accounts for more than two-thirds of the total amount of unsecured creditor's rights, the settlement agreement shall be binding on the debtor and all creditors after it is confirmed by the People’s Court. The debtor shall pay off its debts in accordance with the conditions stipulated in the settlement agreement.
The difference between reconciliation and reorganization
There are differences between reconciliation and reorganization, including the applicant. The applicant for bankruptcy reorganization includes creditors, debtors, and investors (shareholders) accounting for more than one tenth of the debtor's registered capital. The applicant for bankruptcy reconciliation is the debtor; whether to suspend the exercise of security interests in the procedure is different. In the procedure. In addition, in the bankruptcy reorganization procedure, the exercise of security interests is suspended, and in the bankruptcy reconciliation procedure, the exercise of security interests is not suspended, etc.
There is a conversion relationship between the above three legal procedures, namely reorganization, liquidation and reconciliation. In the reorganization procedure, the reorganization procedure may be converted into liquidation procedure due to the debtor's own reasons (such as the deterioration of the debtor's business status and property status, lack of possibility of rescue, etc.), failure to submit the draft reorganization plan within the statutory time-limitation, failure to approve the draft reorganization plan, etc. In the reconciliation procedure, when the settlement agreement is not passed or passed but not approved by the court, the settlement agreement is invalid, the debtor cannot execute or does not execute the settlement agreement, the settlement procedure may be transformed into liquidation procedure. In the liquidation procedure, when the People's Court has accepted the bankruptcy application but the People's Court has not made a ruling declaring bankruptcy to the debtor, and the debtor has the value and feasibility of continuing to operate, the liquidation procedure may be transformed into reorganization procedure or reconciliation procedure, etc.
INTRODUCTION TO HONG KONG WINDING-UP REGIME
Under Hong Kong law, the term “insolvency”, “liquidation” or “winding-up” are used with reference to companies, and “bankruptcy” is used in relation to individuals. The former is primarily regulated by Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions Ordinance) (“CWUO”) (Cap. 32), and the latter by the Bankruptcy Ordinance (Cap 6). The article below focuses on the corporate insolvency regime, in relation to financially distressed companies which are unable to pay its debts or discharges its payment obligations. 
The underlying purpose of corporate insolvency law is to resolve all claims against insolvent companies and provide a fair and orderly process for collecting and realizing the assets of insolvent companies such that the same can be distributed amongst creditors in accordance with the statutory scheme of distribution. 
At present, the legal framework provides assistance to financially distressed businesses through (i) a statutory debt restructuring scheme called scheme of arrangement and (ii) formal liquidation/ winding-up procedures.
Option 1: Restructuring without a winding-up
Debt restructuring is a process whereby a company restructures its debts without liquidation or dissolution. It can be non-statutory and/or statutory. Non-statutory workouts are out-of-court arrangements freely entered into between a debtor company and its creditors and are governed by common law contractual rules. Statutory scheme of arrangements are court sanctioned compromises pursuant to CWUO, which bind all creditors of the debtor company, even though not all consent to the arrangements. Statutory scheme can be utilized alone or in combination with non-statutory scheme. The creditors may try to reach a consensual workout among themselves in the first instance. If no consensus is reached, majority creditors may then apply to the court to sanction their proposed scheme of arrangement.
In many cases, debt restructuring is preferred over winding-up, as the potential return for creditors is usually more. Debt restructuring is, however, not without its distractors who often point to the fact that the process can be unduly cumbersome. Due to the absence of a statutory moratorium or stay of proceedings, dissenting creditors are able to bring claims and actions against the company in the course of the restructuring scheme (unless the court has already sanctioned a statutory scheme of arrangement which is binding on all creditors of the company), thereby impeding the conclusion of the entire process. In such circumstances, liquidation is seen as a better alternative for the purpose of timely disposal of the matter, given the moratorium pending winding-up proceedings.
Option 2: Formal liquidation/ winding-up procedures
Liquidation occurs where a court appointed liquidator assumes control of a company and realizes its assets for distribution, with the company dissolved at the end of the process. Under CWUO, there are two paths to winding up a company in Hong Kong – voluntary winding up or compulsory winding up.
Voluntary winding up occurs via a decision of the company to dissolve itself in a general meeting. It can be further divided into members’ voluntary liquidation (“MVL”) and creditors’ voluntary winding-up (“CVL”). MVL is for solvent companies. As evidence of the company’s solvency, the directors have to sign a “certificate of solvency”, to the effect that they have made a full inquiry into the affairs of the company, and formed the opinion that the company will be able to pay its debts in full within such period not exceeding 12 months from the commencement of the winding-up. On the other hand, CVL is for insolvent companies, whose liabilities exceed the assets available. It is not difficult to distinguish between a MVL and a CVL. Any voluntary liquidation without a certificate of solvency will be a CVL. Both MVL and CVL require shareholders’ sanction, but only the latter is subject to creditors’ oversight due to the insolvent nature of the business.
In contrast, compulsory winding up takes place following a court order for the company to be wound up upon a petition presented by a creditor of the company. Before the grant of a court order, a creditor must satisfy one of the statutory grounds set out in the CWUO, with the most common ground being the company’s failure to pay its debts. Different from voluntary winding-up which is instigated internally, compulsory winding-up can be initiated by the debtor company, shareholders, liquidators，official receiver, the Registrar of Companies and most commonly, creditors. It is subject to a higher degree of external supervision and control, given the involvement of the court.
Pursuant to CWUO s.177, the court may make a winding-up order against a company if it is satisfied that one of the following grounds is made out:
(1)The company has by special resolution (which requires a majority of 75%) resolved that the company be wound up by the Court;
(2)The company does not commence its business within a year from its incorporation or suspends its business for a whole year;
(3)The company has no members;
(4)The company is unable to pay its debts;
(5)The event, if any, occurs on the occurrence of which the memorandum and articles provide that the company is to be dissolved; or
(6)The court is of the opinion that it is just and equitable that the company should be wound up.
The company being unable to pay debts is the most common ground for invoking compulsory winding-up in Hong Kong. Under CWUO s.178, a company is considered unable to pay debts if: 
(1)It is unable to satisfy a statutory demand for a debt of not less than HK$10,000 within 3 weeks from the date of the demand; 
(2)It is unable to satisfy a judgment against a company in part or in whole; or
(3)It is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the company is unable to pay its debts.
The Court will not make a winding-up order if it is satisfied that the debt upon which the petition is based is the subject of a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds.
Future option: Corporate rescue
In line with the international practice, the Hong Kong government will very soon introduce a long-awaited statutory corporate rescue procedure, whereby a company which is or is likely to be insolvent may initiate provisional supervision to yield a corporate rescue proposal and foster restructuring efforts. A prominent feature of corporate rescue is the imposition of statutory moratorium. The effect is to enable the business to be kept alive without going into liquidation, while at the same time preventing creditors from lodging claims to the detriment of ongoing rescue efforts. Such moratorium or stay of winding-up proceedings shall last for 45 business days in the first instance, which can be extended to up to 6 months with the consent of creditors and beyond 6 months for complex cases with leave of the Court. 
The Hong Kong Government tabled the Companies (Corporate Rescue) Bill in late 2020, which is expected to be presented to the Legislative Council in 2021, together with subsidiary legislations relating to the operational matters of corporate rescue procedures. The regime, once introduced, may alter the future landscape of restructuring financially distressed businesses, enabling Hong Kong to retain its status as a regional if not global debt restructuring hub.
特别声明：
以上内容属于作者个人观点，不代表其所在机构立场，亦不应当被视为出具任何形式的法律意见或建议。
本文作者
继续阅读
阅读原文