On January 14, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court held in City of Chicago v. Fulton, 592 U.S. __ (2021), that a creditor in possession of a debtor's property does not violate the automatic stay, specifically section 362(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code, by retaining the property after the filing of a bankruptcy petition. The Court's decision provides important guidance to bankruptcy courts, practitioners, and parties on the scope of the automatic stay's requirements.
On January 14, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court held in City of Chicago v. Fulton, 592 U.S. __ (2021), that a creditor in possession of a debtor's property does not violate the automatic stay, specifically section 362(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code, by retaining the property after the filing of a bankruptcy petition. The Court's decision provides important guidance to bankruptcy courts, practitioners, and parties on the scope of the automatic stay's requirements.
El impacto sostenido en la actividad económica que está teniendo la pandemia COVID-19 ha llevado al Gobierno, por un lado, a adoptar una serie de medidas destinadas a reforzar la liquidez y solvencia de las empresas y, por otro, a extender una vez más algunas de las medidas en el ámbito de la Administración de Justicia que se habían adoptado en el marco del Real Decreto-ley 16/2020, de 28 de abril, posteriormente confirmadas en la Ley 3/2020, de 18 de septiembre, así como en el Real Decreto-Ley 34/2020, de 17 de noviembre.
In Short
The Situation: Circuit courts were split on whether mere retention by a creditor of estate property violates the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay, under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3). The U.S. Supreme Court considered the question inCity of Chicago v. Fulton, in which the City of Chicago had refused to return debtors' vehicles after they filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy petitions.
Los jueces de los juzgados mercantiles de Barcelona han publicado un conjunto de directrices básicas para la tramitación de los ‘pre-packs’ concursales españoles, introduciendo la herramienta, opcional, del “administrador silente” (‘silent administrator’). Las directrices se aprobaron en el contexto de un seminario organizado el pasado 20 de enero.
The judges of the Commercial Courts of Barcelona have released a set of basic guidelines for conducting Spanish insolvency pre-packs in that forum, by introducing the feature -of optional use- of the silent administrator. The guidelines were approved in the context of a seminar organized on January 20th.
Selection of the main judgments on restructuring and insolvency matters.
Silent administrator role allowed in pre-pack sale of business unit
Decision by Barcelona Commercial Court No 7 on October 30, 2020
The decision adopted on October 1, 2020 by commercial judges practicing in Barcelona, Tarragona, Gerona and Lérida states that insolvency receivers, owners or lawyers must report to the Directorate General for Industry of the Catalan Generalitat government regarding any companies with operating business units that have given a pre-insolvency notice, are in insolvency proceedings or other difficult situations
The decision of November 25, 2020, by the Secretary of State for the Economy and Business Support, published the decision by the council of ministers setting out the terms and conditions for the new tranches of the guarantee facilities approved by Royal Decree-Law 25/2020, of July 3, 2020. The new tranches are to be used for funding to businesses under an arrangement and any which, while not under an arrangement, were in the process of reviewing their promissory note program on MARF (Spanish Alternative Bond Market) on April 23, 2020.
La prolongada duración de los efectos de la pandemia COVID-19 sobre el tejido económico empresarial ha impulsado al Gobierno a extender en el tiempo algunas de las medidas en el ámbito de la Administración de Justicia que se habían adoptado en el marco del Real Decreto-Ley 16/2020, de 28 de abril, posteriormente confirmadas en la Ley 3/2020, de 18 de septiembre.