Tai-Soo Suk v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd

In Tai-Soo Suk v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd, the plaintiff, Tai-Soo Suk, sought recognition from the Federal Court of Australia of a foreign main proceeding in the Seoul Central District Court, Republic of Korea, and recognition as a foreign representative. Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd, a South Korean shipping company, had been placed in rehabilitation proceedings by the Seoul Central District Court on 1 September 2016, following financial difficulties. Suk, a former director of Hanjin, was appointed as the custodian of the company in the Korean rehabilitation proceedings. On 23 September 2016, Suk applied to the Federal Court for recognition of the Korean proceedings as foreign main proceedings and for recognition as a foreign representative under the Cross-Border Insolvency Act 2008 (Cth).

The court was required to determine several key legal issues. First, whether the Korean rehabilitation proceeding qualified as a "foreign main proceeding" under the Cross-Border Insolvency Act 2008 (Cth). Second, whether Suk qualified as a "foreign representative" under the same Act. Third, whether the stay and suspension provisions under article 20 of the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency should apply in the same manner as under Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Lastly, the court needed to decide on the appropriate scope of the stay and suspension of actions against Hanjin’s assets and vessels in Australia.

The court recognised the Korean rehabilitation proceeding as a foreign main proceeding and Suk as a foreign representative. It found that the stay and suspension provisions under article 20 of the Model Law should operate in the same manner as under Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The court issued an order prohibiting enforcement or recovery actions against Hanjin’s property and vessels in Australia without the consent of Suk or leave of the Court. The court also granted Suk the authority to examine witnesses, take evidence, and require the delivery of information concerning Hanjin’s assets and affairs. Finally, the court entrusted the administration, realisation, and distribution of Hanjin’s assets in Australia to Suk. The court extended certain deadlines for compliance with publication and filing requirements due to delays caused by circumstances beyond Suk’s control.