Recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings in Norway

The Norwegian Bankruptcy Act as it currently stands does not recognise foreign insolvency proceedings or debt negotiations. This means that under Norwegian law an estate’s assets in Norway are not protected against separate debt recovery proceedings whilst subject to foreign insolvency proceedings. However, on 8 June 2016 the Norwegian Parliament approved an amendment (LOV-2016-06-17-55) to the Bankruptcy Act which includes, amongst other, the recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings in Norway (the “Amendment”).

Access to a particular jurisdiction may be of little value if the implemented restructuring is not recognised in jurisdictions where the debtor has assets or operations.

There are numerous reasons for a debtor, creditor or stakeholder to prefer a particular jurisdiction when faced with insolvency proceedings. However, as mentioned in the article “Forum shopping when restructuring” on page 23 in this Update, access to a particular jurisdiction may be of little value if the implemented restructuring is not recognised in jurisdictions where the debtor has assets or operations. A number of countries now recognise foreign insolvency proceedings. Simply speaking this means that should a company become insolvent then the insolvency proceedings in these states will recognise assets in other states, providing greater protection in a situation of insolvency. This will provide an incentive for companies to seek access to the jurisdiction of these states. 

International rules and regulations

As early as in 1933 the Nordic countries entered into the Nordic Bankruptcy Convention which automatically provides recognition of bankruptcy (both in respect of individuals and companies) within Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Iceland and Norway. In 1997 the UN issued the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (the “Model Law”). Legislation based on the Model Law has now been adopted in 41 states in 43 jurisdictions. The EU member states also recognise insolvency proceedings within the other EU member states under EC Council Regulation 1346/2000 (the “Regulation”); this is not however applicable to EEA states.

Changes to the Norwegian Bankruptcy Act

The aim of the Amendment is to arrange for well-functioning winding-up processes where debtors have assets in several jurisdictions in line with the Model Law and the Regulation. The changes give the Bankruptcy Act a reciprocal effect. This means foreign insolvency proceedings will be recognised in Norway if they are commenced in states with legislation that recognise insolvency proceedings commenced in Norway. Shortly explained, once insolvency proceedings have been notified in Norway, the estate may seize a debtor’s assets in Norway and the debtor will have no right to control such assets.

Once insolvency proceedings have been notified in Norway, the estate may seize a debtor’s assets in Norway and the debtor will have no right to control such assets.

The Amendment also includes changes to the rules on choice of law in respect of the effect of foreign insolvency proceedings in Norway. As a main rule this means that the law of the state in which the insolvency proceedings have been commenced will determine whether and to what extent a foreign estate may seize assets in Norway and to what extent the debtor’s control over such assets will be limited. There are however exceptions to this main rule.

The Amendment has not yet been implemented. However, once implemented Norway will become part of those jurisdictions that provide reciprocal protection for foreign insolvency proceedings and thus is likely to become a more attractive option for debtors, creditors or stakeholders when a company faces insolvency.

Relevante artikler

  • Shipping Offshore

    2016

    When charterers fail to pay hire: owners’ dilemma finally resolved, but still be careful!

    The Court of Appeal has handed down judgment in the case of Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co Ltd (“GCL”) v Spar Shipping AS (“Spar”) ( [2016] EWCA Civ 982), deciding unequivocally that missing a single instalment of hire under a time charter is not a breach of condition.

  • Shipping Offshore

    2016

    Norway considers ratification of the Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention

    A year and a half after the entry into force of the Wreck Removal Convention (the “Convention”), the Norwegian Ministry of Transport has recently completed a consultation process on a proposal to ratify the Convention and to implement the Convention into Norwegian law. The Ministry has suggested that the Convention rules shall be implemented on a dual basis side-by-side with existing legislation.

  • Shipping Offshore

    2016

    The ballast water convention

    Having now achieved the required number of signatories, the new International Maritime Organisation (IMO) International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “Convention”) originally adopted in 2004 will enter into force on 8 September 2017. The Convention is expected to have a significant impact on ships engaged in international trade by requiring them to manage their ballast water and sediments to certain minimum standards, and eventually to install onboard ballast water management systems.