Legislative proposals to codify directors' liability for insolvent trading in Hong Kong : a 10-year journey

Hong Kong is a modern global city with a reputation for well-regulated financial markets, but for years, the government had been trying to enact laws on corporate rescue procedures with relatively little success. It is under the pretext of the Global Financial Crisis, the threat of a future economic meltdown gave the Hong Kong government the impetus to revisit this issue. This third attempt to codify statutory obligations on directors’ liability for insolvent trading has been criticised for either setting the standards too high or low for directors trading whilst insolvent. There is also some reservation given the beliefs and values of directors in Chinese family-owned and controlled companies. These companies would most likely trade out the difficult times. Nevertheless, this does not negate from the fact that the enactment of corporate rescue procedures in Hong Kong in 2010 is a momentous achievement for the Hong Kong government.

Director liability for uncommercial transactions : is s 588G(1A) impotent to provide liquidators the means to seek compensation for creditors?

In the 10 years since the addition of uncommercial transactions to the table of deemed “debts incurred” in s 588G(1A) of the Corporations Act, the sub-section has arguably achieved little. This article explains why this has been so, and what needs to be done to enable this aspect of Australia’s insolvent trading laws to operate effectively and as originally intended.

Bailing out the FEG : is the Fair Entitlements Guarantee (formerly GEERS) approaching its own fiscal cliff?

This article discusses what recent statistics and public reports reveal about the funding of GEERS (now the FEG) and its bottom line. The article examines (1) whether there has been a “blowout” in the scheme which guarantees the recovery of employee entitlements in liquidations and (2) what might be done to put the scheme on a firmer fiscal footing.

Regulating against corporate phoenix activity

This paper considers the adequacy and efficiency of existing legal and regulatory frameworks to deal with corporate phoenix activity. Phoenix activity, which is often triggered by a solvency crisis, is estimated to cost the Australian economy up to $3 billion each year. Despite the raft of piecemeal Australian legislation directed at this activity, phoenix activity does not appear to be abating. This paper considers regulatory approaches to detection and enforcement of the underlying law. This study reveals and explores a perception that the law is deficient, and the tension that exists between the adequacy of the law and the regulatory approach.

The conundrum of phoenix activity: Is further reform necessary?

Phoenix activity presents a conundrum for the law and its regulators. While there is economic cost associated with all phoenix activity, the underlying behaviour is not always illegal. A transaction with indicators of phoenix activity may be an entirely innocent and well-intentioned display of entrepreneurial spirit, albeit one that has ended in failure. Restructuring post business failure is not illegal per se. Recent reforms targeting phoenix activity fail to grapple with the vast range of behaviour that can be described as phoenix activity since they do not differentiate between legal and illegal activity. This article explores the importance of the distinction between legal and illegal phoenix activity, the extent to which the existing law captures a range of behaviour that can be described as illegal phoenix activity and the response of key regulators and governmental bodies to the absence of single law that attempts to define illegal phoenix activity.

Mining trading partners’ preferences for efficient multi-issue bargaining in E‑business

Classical negotiation models are weak in supporting real-world business negotiations because these models often assume that the preference information of each negotiator is made public. Although parametric learning methods have been proposed for acquiring the preference information of negotiation opponents, these methods suffer from the strong assumptions about the specific utility function and negotiation mechanism employed by the opponents. Consequently, it is difficult to apply these learning methods to the heterogeneous negotiation agents participating in e‑marketplaces. This paper illustrates the design, development, and evaluation of a nonparametric negotiation knowledge discovery method which is underpinned by the well-known Bayesian learning paradigm. According to our empirical testing, the novel knowledge discovery method can speed up the negotiation processes while maintaining negotiation effectiveness. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first nonparametric negotiation knowledge discovery method developed and evaluated in the context of multi-issue bargaining over e‑marketplaces.