Asia: Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring

The NCLAT, Principal Bench through its judgment dated 03.08.2026 in the matter of Ammeet Kumar Agarwal vs. Ssarvi Resolution Services LLP, Resolution Professional of Supreme Transport Organisation Pvt. Ltd., affirmed the order of the NCLT, Mumbai directing the suspended directors of the Corporate Debtor to jointly and severally restore funds to the Corporate Debtor’s account withdrawn during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gloster Limited v. Gloster Cables Limited[1], is a significant exposition on the limits of the adjudicatory powers of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Although the immediate controversy concerned proprietary rights over the trademark “GLOSTER”.

Significant economic challenges facing Thailand in recent years have placed financial pressure on both individuals and businesses. As a result, many debtors may find themselves unable to meet their repayment obligations, leading to bankruptcy proceedings.

In Re Fantasia Holdings Group [2026] HKCFI 3449, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance sanctioned a scheme of arrangement under section 670 of the Companies Ordinance...

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) was introduced as a path-breaking legislation to provide a time-bound and creditor-driven process for the resolution of corporate insolvency in India.

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark ruling addressing the growing threat of AI-generated fabricated legal precedents in judicial proceedings. In Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd., the Court established a zero-tolerance policy toward hallucinated case law, setting aside tribunal orders that relied on non-existent judgments while establishing comprehensive guidelines for the responsible use of artificial intelligence in the legal profession.