Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 OCTOBER 2018

Prohibition Against Assignment Of Receivables – A Charge As An Alternative?

The High Court also held that there was no required mutuality of debts for insolvent set-off to occur, if the debt was charged to another party.

SingaporeFinance and Banking

Jurong Aromatics Corp Pte Ltd (receivers and managers appointed) and others v BP Singapore Pte Ltd and another matter [2018] SGHC 215 ("Jurong Aromatics")

The Singapore High Court recently considered the effect of a prohibition against assignment clause on assets subject to a charge. The decision confirms that, while such a prohibition is effective to prevent an assignment of assets, it did not restrict a charge on the asset.

The High Court also held that there was no required mutuality of debts for insolvent set-off to occur, if the debt was charged to another party.

Facts of Jurong Aromatics

The joint venture Jurong Aromatics Corporation ("JAC") was tasked with the development of the Jurong Aromatics Plant on Jurong Island ("Plant"). Glencore Singapore Pte Ltd ("Glencore") and BP Singapore Pte Ltd ("BP") were suppliers to JAC under their respective feedstock supply agreements, and also customers of JAC under their respective product offtake agreements.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from