In the previous four articles in this series (see here) we looked at the key role of professional investors at startups, though also at the setbacks of the exclusive dependence of these types of companies on equity and the advantages debt would have for them. The environment, as we saw, is also a favorable one for borrowing. We described the difficulty to provide general recipes for getting debt and a few not very promising routes.
En los cuatro artículos anteriores de esta serie (ver aquí) analizamos el papel clave de los inversores profesionales en las 'startups', pero también las desventajas de la exclusiva dependencia de este tipo de empresas del 'equity' y las ventajas que tendría la deuda para ellas. El entorno, como vimos, es además favorable para el endeudamiento. Abordamos la dificultad de ofrecer recetas generales para conseguir deuda y algunas vías no muy prometedoras.
In a significant ruling having widespread ramifications, the Hon’ble Supreme Court (Court) on 14 August 2018 pronounced its judgment in the case of State of Bank of India v V. Ramakrishnan & Anr (Civil Appeal No. 3595 of 2018). The Court held that the period of moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) would not apply to the personal guarantors of a corporate debtor. Factual Background |