Existence of foreign restructuring proceedings does not justify non-compliance, High Court rules

The High Court has ordered a Korean navigation technology company to comply with extensive disclosure obligations in a £90 million damages inquiry, rejecting attempts to rely on South Korean rehabilitation proceedings to delay or derail the English litigation.

The proceedings were brought by the UK Hydrographic Office (UKHO), an executive agency of the UK Ministry of Defence responsible for producing and licensing official nautical charts used by naval and commercial vessels worldwide, against Samyung ENC Co Ltd. In 2022, the English High Court found that Samyung had breached its licensing agreements with the UKHO by unlawfully copying, decrypting, and exploiting Admiralty electronic navigational chart data beyond the scope of its licences. Since then, the proceedings have been confined to an inquiry as to damages, which is heavily dependent on sales and usage data that UKHO says Samyung has repeatedly failed to disclose.

Samyung entered rehabilitation proceedings in South Korea in early 2025. Those proceedings were subsequently recognised in England as a foreign main proceeding under the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations, resulting in a temporary stay of the English damages inquiry. That stay was later lifted in December 2025 after the Insolvency and Companies Court concluded that allowing the damages inquiry to proceed was consistent with the objectives of the Model Law and would promote an efficient and orderly determination of claims rather than undermine the collective insolvency process.

Despite the lifting of the stay, Samyung failed to engage with the disclosure process, did not apply for relief from sanctions, and made a further rehabilitation application in Korea shortly before a relisted hearing in England. The High Court rejected the suggestion that the existence of foreign restructuring proceedings justified continued non-compliance, holding that insolvency protection could not be used as a tactical shield against court-ordered disclosure in a claim already well advanced. The Court also found that Samyung’s repeated disclosure failures were deliberate and had frustrated the Court’s ability to assess damages.

The Court accepted that entering a quantified money judgment against a company subject to foreign rehabilitation was an exceptional step, but held it was justified where the defendant’s conduct made a conventional damages inquiry impossible. Any resulting judgment would form a provable claim in the foreign proceedings, rather than confer enforcement priority, preserving the integrity of the insolvency distribution regime.

As a result, the Court granted an order requiring Samyung to provide full extended disclosure and a confirming witness statement by mid-February 2026, failing which judgment will be entered for more than £90 million.

Read the decision here.

Jaani Riordan of 8 New Square (instructed by Burges Salmon) acted for UKHO.