The Supreme Court decision in Bresco made it clear that a company in liquidation does have the right to adjudicate its disputes under a construction contract. Any difficulties concerning potential repayment by an insolvent company to the paying party if the paying party later should overturn the adjudicator's decision should be taken into account at the summary judgment hearing to enforce an adjudicator's decision.
Now, with the case of John Doyle v. Erith Contractors, we have further guidance as to how the court will approach enforcement.
As previously reported, the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) had made some permanent and temporary changes to the insolvency regime.
Here we focus on the impact of CIGA on construction contracts and, in particular, how the new provisions impact on construction contracts and the Construction Act.
What is CICA?
With a recent draft act to amend the German Insolvency Code (Insolvenzordnung – InsO), the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection intends to reduce uncertainty regarding insolvency claw-back, in particular regarding Sec. 133 InsO. The result may be that restructuring opinions that are now market standard when (re)financing financially troubled companies in Germany become redundant.
Current legal status
In a situation where the survival of a German company depends on restructuring measures by third parties (mainly lenders) who fear that the shareholders may use their hold-out position in a potential subsequent exit by sale of the shares, it is an option for the lenders to demand from the shareholders that the shares are transferred to a trustee to be held in a “double-sided trust” (doppelnützige Treuhand).
Key point
In a financial restructuring, creditors have to pay attention that the restructuring undertakings of the insolvent company are likely to be achieved.
Background
Under German insolvency law, the insolvency administrator may challenge a transaction if an insolvent company intended to disadvantage its creditors (and the other party knew that intention). The German Supreme Court presumes such intention if a company knew about its impending illiquidity.
Facts
This article looks at ways to restructure debt taken up by a German company. First it discusses financings governed by English law and then moves on to look at options where German law-governs the debt.
Financings governed by English law (restructuring through schemes of arrangement)
In recent years a number of German companies such as Tele Columbus, Rodenstock and Primacom have used English law scheme of arrangements to restructure their debt.
An element of the restructuring toolbox
To date, the German Insolvency Code (Insolvenzordnung) does not contain provisions governing group insolvencies. If several entities within a group of companies become insolvent, individual insolvency proceedings are opened and sometimes even individual insolvency administrators are appointed for each entity.
German proposals
This is the second part of a two-part article on ways to restructure debt taken up by a German company. The first part looked at financings governed by English law, this second part deals with German law-governed debt.
Part II – Financings governed by German law (restructuring through protective shield proceedings or schemes of arrangement)
This is a two-part article on ways to restructure debt taken up by a German company. The first part looks at financings under English law, the second refers to German law-governed debt.
Part I – Financings governed by English law (restructuring through schemes of arrangement)
In recent years a number of German companies such as Tele Columbus, Rodenstock and Primacom have used English law scheme of arrangements to restructure their debt.
An element of the restructuring toolbox