The law of 11 August 2017 that adds Book XX "Insolvency of Enterprises" into the Code of Economic Law enters into force on 1 May 2018.

As we already stated in our previous contributions about the reform of the insolvency law, this law modifies and regroups the Bankruptcy law and the Law of 31 January 2009 on the Continuity of Enterprises.

1. The notion "Enterprise" replaces the notion "Merchant"

On 13 July 2017 parliament voted to introduce book XX "Insolvency of Companies" in the Code of Economic Law.

In a previous article we already wrote that the insolvency law would be adapted to current national and international regulations and case law and would be incorporated into the Code of Economic Law as a coherent whole.

In this way, solvency procedures must be more transparent, efficient and effective.

Minister of Justice Koen Geens has abandoned the introduction of the 'silent bankruptcy' following a judgment of 22 June 2017 of the European Court of Justice.

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).

In Re Sino-Forest Corporation¹, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the interpretation of “equity claims” employed by Justice Morawetz of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List).

Prior to the 2009 amendments (the “Amendments”) to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”),¹  courts exercising jurisdiction under that statute could, in the appropriate circumstances, approve “roll up” debtor in possession (“DIP”) financing arrangements.  While it can take different forms, in essence, a “roll up” DIP loan facility is an arrangement whereby an existing lender refinances or repays its pre-filing loan by way of borrowings under the new DIP loan facility.  The priority status of the charge granted by the court to secure the DIP

In the Kitchener Frame Ltd¹ decision, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) confirmed that third-party releases in proposals made under the BIA² are permitted. In doing so, the Court relied on the principle that the BIA and CCAA³ ought to be read and interpreted, harmoniously. Finally, the Court sanctioned a consolidated proposal on the basis it met the requirements set out in section 59(2) of the BIA.

On October 30, 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada released its long-anticipated decision in Quebec (Revenue) v. Caisse populaire Desjardins de Montmagny. At issue in this case (and two companion cases) was the legal characterization of Crown rights with respect to collected but unremitted GST and Quebec sales tax (QST) in the hands of a trustee in bankruptcy. The Supreme Court confirmed that the Crown is an ordinary unsecured creditor with respect to such amounts, subject to the rights of prior ranking security holders.

Summary of Facts