The events in the last few years have had significant and lasting impacts on business in general and restructuring in particular, with the latter referring to the various options available for firms experiencing difficulties. European economies, hit by both the upheavals caused by the health crisis and geopolitical tensions, have also been a

Many companies will likely be forced to deal with debts and liquidity issues – one must act smart and early to keep the problems from snowballing.

Advice to creditors: stop the snowballing effect

Suspension of managers’ duty to file for insolvency proceedings

Preconditions for starting an LPP:

1) no liquidation initiated against the debtor;

2) in the previous 5 years, the debtor has not implemented and completed LPP;

Persons entitled to file an insolvency application and insolvency (IS) proceedings entry criteria: 

1) A non-secured creditor or a secured creditor (regarding the non-secured part of the claim), in cases where:

1) Debtor prepares OCLPP plan & obtains approval from creditors:

- more than 50% non-secured creditors (total of principal claims);

- at least 2/3 secured creditors (total of principal claims).

Who may not vote (on approval the plan): persons in the same group of companies, shareholders (natural persons) with decisive influence and persons who acquired claims against the debtor from the aforementioned persons within the previous 2 years.

2) Debtor and creditors agree on supervisor's candidate during OCLPP.

On 12 May 2017, the Supreme Court of Lithuania issued a ruling, which further contributes to the case-law concerning setting of the procedure and price of the realisation of assets with regard to a bankrupt company. The ruling recognises that, in certain exceptional cases, a decision on the price and procedure for the realisation of assets may be made by a court independently and in disregard of the principle of autonomy of the creditors’ meeting of a bankrupt company.

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas toliau formuoja praktiką dėl kreditorių teisėtų interesų apsaugos. 2017 m. gegužės 4 d. išnagrinėtoje byloje Nr. 3K-3-211-469/2017 buvo sprendžiama dėl bendrovės vadovo ir jos akcininko civilinės atsakomybės, kreditoriui jiems pareiškus tiesioginį ieškinį.

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas 2017 m. gegužės 12 d. priėmė nutartį, kuria toliau formuoja praktiką, susijusią su bankrutavusios įmonės turto realizavimo tvarkos ir kainos nustatymu. Nutartyje pripažinta, kad tam tikrais išskirtiniais atvejais sprendimą dėl turto realizavimo kainos ir tvarkos nustatymo teismas gali priimti savarankiškai, nepaisydamas bankrutavusios įmonės kreditorių susirinkimo autonomijos principo.

In practice there a numerous uncertainties in relation to civil liability of management bodies of companies, scope of such liability, and related matters. On 4 April 2017, considering the current situation, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania (the Supreme Court or SC) published the first overview of case law in relation to application of the norms of civil law regulating civil liability of management bodies of companies in the case law of the Supreme Court.