After having implemented stricter anti-bribery and corruption regulations in late 2015 and mid2016, new criminal law provisions regarding confiscation orders and asset recovery will enter into force on 1 July 2017. The present legislation was considered to be insufficient. Further, the law implements European provisions into national law. The law provides new rules for compensation of damaged parties and lower prerequisites for confiscations.

The German Parliament passed an act to reduce the risk of clawback actions and provide more legal certainty in this regard under German law, the so called "Act for the Improvement of Legal Certainty concerning Clawback pursuant to the German Insolvency Code and the Creditor's Avoidance of Transfers Act" (Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtssicherheit bei Anfechtungen nach der Insolvenzordnung und dem Anfechtungsgesetz) on Thursday, 16 February 2017.

License purchases can be excluded from the insolvency administrator’s right to reject or assume contracts

The liability regime under Section 64 sentence 1 GmbHG and Sections 92 para. 2, 93 para. 3 Nr. 6 AktG for payments made after the company’s insolvency imposes severe personal liability risk on the management of limited liability companies and stock corporations. This does not only apply to the management of German limited liability companies (“GmbH”) and stock corporations (“AG”) but also to companies incorporated under foreign law that have their centre of main interest in Germany, as the European Court of Justice has decided just recently.

On February 24, 2016, the legal committee (Rechtsausschuss) of the German parliament (Bundestag) held a hearing on the proposed reform to considerably limit the clawback regime (Insolvenzanfechtung) in the German insolvency code (Insolvenzordnung – InsO). The general gist of hearing was that the current German governing party coalition is still determined to enact the reform, with some modifications as to the scope and protected parties still up for discussion.

The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH) on 5 March 2015 issued a decision (case no. IX ZR 133/14, available here) that is of immense relevance for all creditors and debtors that face the need of a subordination agreement (Rangrücktrittvereinbarung) under German law.

Yesterday, the European Commission announced that it was termporarily approving, under E.U.

Deutschland erhält ein neues Restrukturierungsrecht, und zwar voraussichtlich ab 1. Januar 2021. Herzstück der im aktuellen Gesetzesentwurf vorgesehenen Neuregelungen ist die Schaffung des sogenannten Stabilisierungs- und Restrukturierungsrahmens („SRR“) für Unternehmen. Der SRR soll die Restrukturierung eines Unternehmens ermöglichen, bevor ein Insolvenzverfahren eingeleitet werden muss. Die Gesetzesänderung wird daher einen großen Einfluss auf die Restrukturierungspraxis haben.

Wi­der­le­gung der Ver­mu­tung ei­ner ein­ge­tre­te­nen Zah­lungs­un­fä­hig­keit durch Ein­ho­lung ei­nes Sach­ver­stän­di­gen­gut­ach­tens (BGH, Be­schluss vom 12. Sep­tem­ber 2019 – IX ZR 342/18)

Ein kürz­lich er­gan­ge­ner Be­schluss des BGH setzt sich mit der Fra­ge aus­ein­an­der, wie der An­fech­tungs­geg­ner der An­nah­me der Zah­lungs­un­fä­hig­keit des Schuld­ners im Pro­zess ent­ge­gen­tre­ten kann.

Auswirkungen für Vermieter und Verpächter