Recently, government introduced a new draft law on the reform of the Bankruptcy Act and the Law regarding the Continuity of Enterprises (LCE).
The draft law still needs to be approved by the Federal Parliament, but it is expected to come into effect no later than 1 September 2017.
The current legislation on insolvency will be made up to date and adapted to European Regulations. Moreover it will be incorporated into the Code of Economic Law to make it a coherent set.
Below is a brief overview of the main new elements of the law.
As from 1 April 2017, Bankruptcy files will be held and followed up entirely electronically in the Central Insolvency Register.
Any bankruptcy that will be declared open as from 1 April 2017, has to be registered and kept in the Central Insolvency Register instead of the Commercial Courts Registry.
The Central Insolvency Register, hereinafter referred to as "the Register", is the computerized database in which bankruptcy files are registered and retained (www.regsol.be).
On May 4, 2015, in the case Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, the United States Supreme Court held that debtors in chapter 13 (and presumably chapter 9 and 11 as well) are not entitled as of right to immediately appeal bankruptcy court orders denying confirmation of a proposed plan of reorganization. This ruling, although consistent with a majority of circuit courts of appeal that have considered the issue, reversed governing precedent in several circuit courts—including the Third Circuit, which reviews Delaware bankruptcy court decisions.
On June 9, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, a case that tested the extent of the jurisdiction of bankruptcy court judges to decide fraudulent transfer and certain other claims against non-debtors. Ropes & Gray LLP represented the petitioner in obtaining certiorari and in the Supreme Court proceedings.
On September 13, 2011, Judge Mary F. Walrath of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware granted standing for an equity committee in In re Washington Mutual, Inc. (“WaMu”) to seek “equitable disallowance” of claims held by noteholders that had traded claims after engaging in negotiations with WaMu over the terms of a global restructuring.