Comme déjà évoqué dans notre article précédent à ce sujet, le concept du transfert d’entreprise constitue l’un des piliers de la réforme du droit de l’insolvabilité en Belgique.

Dans cet article, nous introduisions le concept du transfert d’entreprise sous autorité judiciaire, revu depuis la réforme du 1er septembre 2023.

La présente contribution constitue la deuxième partie du sujet, portant cette fois sur le transfert d’une entreprise qui intervient dans le cadre d’une préparation privée (confidentielle) à la faillite.

Zoals reeds vermeld in ons vorig artikel in deze materie, is het concept van de overdracht van een onderneming één van de pijlers van de hervorming van het insolventierecht in België.

U maakte reeds kennis met het concept van de overdracht van ondernemingen onder gerechtelijk gezag, dat herzien is sinds de hervorming van 1 september 2023.

Deze bijdrage vormt het tweede deel van dit onderwerp, ditmaal over de overdracht van een onderneming in het kader van een "besloten voorbereiding van een faillissement".

As already mentioned in our previous article on this subject, the concept of the transfer of a business is one of the pillars of the reform of insolvency law in Belgium.

In our previous article regarding this subject, we introduced the concept of the transfer of a business under judicial authority, reviewed since the reform as of 1 September 2023.

This contribution constitutes the second part of the subject, and deals with the transfer of a business in the context of a private (confidential) preparation prior to bankruptcy.

Our precedent contribution contained introductory remarks on the reform of insolvency law, which came into force on 1 September 2023. As indicated, this contribution focuses on a key element of this reform.

The revision of the insolvency landscape has not spared the concept of the transfer of business, which is one of its pillars.

The transfer of a business can take place at two stages: as part of a public judicial reorganisation proceeding, but also as part of a silent preparation prior to bankruptcy.

Notre contribution précédente comprenait les propos introductifs portant sur la réforme du droit de l’insolvabilité, entrée en vigueur ce 1er septembre 2023. Comme indiqué, la présente contribution porte sur un élément clé de cette réforme.

La révision du paysage de l’insolvabilité n’a pas épargné le concept du transfert d’entreprise, qui en constitue l’un des piliers.

Le transfert de l'entreprise peut intervenir à deux stades : dans le cadre d’une procédure de réorganisation judiciaire publique, mais également dans le cadre d’une préparation silencieuse à la faillite.

Federal appellate courts have traditionally applied a "person aggrieved" standard to determine whether a party has standing to appeal a bankruptcy court order or judgment. However, this standard, which requires a direct, adverse, and financial impact on a potential appellant, is derived from a precursor to the Bankruptcy Code and does not appear in the existing statute.

The court-fashioned doctrine of "equitable mootness" has frequently been applied to bar appeals of bankruptcy court orders under circumstances where reversal or modification of an order could jeopardize, for example, the implementation of a negotiated chapter 11 plan or related agreements and upset the expectations of third parties who have relied on the order.

On June 6, 2023, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas confirmed the chapter 11 plan of bedding manufacturer Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC and its affiliates (collectively, "Serta"). In confirming Serta's plan, the court held that a 2020 "uptier," or "position enhancement," transaction (the "2020 Transaction") whereby Serta issued new debt secured by a priming lien on its assets and purchased its existing debt from participating lenders at a discount with a portion of the proceeds did not violate the terms of Serta's 2016 credit agreement.

Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code's "safe harbor" preventing avoidance in bankruptcy of certain securities, commodity, or forward-contract payments has long been a magnet for controversy. Several noteworthy court rulings have been issued in bankruptcy cases addressing the application of the provision, including application to financial institutions, its preemptive scope, and its application to non-publicly traded securities.

Bankruptcy trustees and chapter 11 debtors-in-possession ("DIPs") frequently seek to avoid fraudulent transfers and obligations under section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and state fraudulent transfer or other applicable nonbankruptcy laws because the statutory "look-back" period for avoidance under many nonbankruptcy laws exceeds the two-year period governing avoidance actions under section 548.