Fulltext Search
Supreme Court Sides with Trademark Licensees in Rejection Dispute

The Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated ruling yesterday in the First Circuit case of Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, resolving a circuit split that had developed on “whether [a] debtor‑licensor’s rejection of an [executory trademark licensing agreement] deprives the licensee of its rights to use the trademark.” And it answered that question in the negative; i.e., in favor of licensees.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Trademarks, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP
The Devil Is in the Details … The Doctrine of Recoupment

When it comes to offsets, bankruptcy law provides for two distinct remedies: (1) setoff and (2) recoupment.

Setoff allows a creditor to reduce the amount of prepetition debt it owes a debtor with a corresponding reduction of that creditor’s prepetition claim against the debtor. The remedy of setoff is subject to the automatic stay, as well as various conditions under § 553 of the Bankruptcy Code — including that it does not apply if the debts arise on opposite sides of the date on which the debtor’s case was commenced.

USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Medicare
Bundesverfassungsgericht entscheidet: Juristische Personen bleiben weiterhin vom Amt des Insolvenzverwalters ausgeschlossen

(BVerfG, Beschluss vom 12.01.2016, Az. 1 BvR 3102/13)

Das Bundesverfassungsgericht hat sich per Beschluss vom 12. Januar 2016 zu der Frage geäußert, ob der Ausschluss juristischer Personen von der Bestellung als Insolvenzverwalter verfassungsgemäß ist oder nicht. Anlass war die Verfassungsbeschwer- de einer auf Insolvenzverwaltung spezialisierten Gesellschaft von Rechtsanwälten, welche zuvor die Aufnahme auf die Vorauswahlliste für Insolvenzverwalter eines Amtsgerichts vergeblich vor den Zivilgerichten zu erstreiten versucht hatte.

Germany, Insolvency & Restructuring, Legal Practice, Litigation, CMS Germany, Economy, Liquidator (law), Federal Constitutional Court of Germany
Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court rules that legal entities remain excluded from acting as insolvency administrators

(Federal Constitutional Court, judgment dated 12 January 2016, case ref. 1 BvR 3102/13)

Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court has now ruled on whether the exclusion of legal entities from being appointed as insolvency administrator is constitutional or  not in its judgment dated 12 January 2016. The ruling was triggered by a constitutional complaint from a firm of lawyers specialising in insolvency administration, which had previously argued in vain before the civil courts for inclusion by a local court on its pre-selected list of insolvency administrators.

Germany, Insolvency & Restructuring, Legal Practice, Litigation, CMS Germany, Legal personality, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany
EuGH-Entscheidung ebnet den Weg für Haftung von Geschäftsführern ausländischer Gesellschaften nach § 64 GmbHG

Mit seinem Urteil vom 10. Dezember 2015, Az. C-594 / 14, hat der EuGH entschieden, dass die Haftung eines Geschäftsführers für verbotene Aus- zahlungen nach Insolvenzreife nach §64 GmbHG eine insolvenzrechtliche Regelung darstellt und deshalb dem Anwendungsbereich der EuInsVO unterliegt.

European Union, Germany, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, CMS Germany
ECJ decision paves the way for liability of managing directors of foreign companies under section 64 of the German Limited Liability Companies Act (GmbHG)

In its ruling dated 10 December 2015, case ref. C-594 / 14, the ECJ decided that the liability of a managing director for prohibited payments following insolvency under section 64 of the GmbHG is a provision covered by insolvency law and therefore falls within the scope of application of the EU Insolvency Regulation.

European Union, Germany, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, CMS Germany, Court of Justice of the European Union