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.
Analizamos la Ley 3/2020, de 18 de septiembre, de medidas procesales y organizativas para hacer frente al COVID-19 en el ámbito de la Administración de Justicia para comprobar qué hay nuevo y qué ha cambiado esta nueva regulación respecto a la norma que la precedió, el RDL 16/2020 publicado durante la primera oleada de la pandemia.
In March 2020, Business Secretary Alok Sharma announced that provisions on wrongful trading would be suspended. The move came as part of a wider package of measures that sought to provide assistance to businesses – and their beleaguered boards – experiencing financial distress due to Covid-19.
Now set out in the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA), which was passed on 26 June 2020, the provisions adapt the wrongful trading regime making directors’ liability for the “relevant period” unlikely.
Why does it matter?
On 26 June 2020 the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (CIGA) came into force. The CIGA has made both permanent and short-term changes to the insolvency regime in response to the coronavirus pandemic and its consequences.
Why does it matter?
One of the permanent reforms provides that a contractual term of a contract to supply services or goods will be ineffective if:
Como ya hiciera la Comisión Europea con su instrumento de liquidez para apoyo a la solvencia (Solvency Support Instrument) lanzado a finales de mayo y cuyos rasgos generales se describen aquí, el Gobierno de España ha creado, mediante el Real Decreto-ley 25/2020, un nuevo fondo para intentar prevenir las insolvencias
Selección de las principales resoluciones en materia de reestructuraciones e insolvencias.
La competencia para conocer de un ERTE por fuerza mayor derivada del COVID-19 corresponde a la jurisdicción laboral y no al juez del concurso
Auto del Juzgado de lo Mercantil de León, de 1 de abril de 2020
Un informe de la Comisión Europea, del 3 de diciembre de 2019, analiza en los marcos legales sobre insolvencia e impago de deudas de los diferentes Estados miembros y, en concreto, los distintos sistemas de ejecución –tanto individual como colectiva– y su efectividad para recuperar los créditos de dudoso cobro (NPLs).
Jurisdiction to hear a case related to a temporary layoff procedure due to force majeure caused by COVID-19 lies with labor courts not the insolvency judge
Decision by León Commercial Court, April 1, 2020
In this study dated on December 3, 2019 the European Commission analyzes the legal frameworks on insolvency and defaults in the various member states; specifically, the various individual and collective loan enforcement systems –and their effectiveness for recovering non-performing loans (NPLs).