On March 28, 2020[1], the UK Government announced that it will introduce new legislation extending the UK’s existing restructuring and insolvency laws to include:
Unternehmen, die aufgrund der Corona-Krise Liquiditätsprobleme entwickeln, sollen auf staatliche Finanzierungshilfen zurückgreifen können. Die Bundesregierung hat diesbezüglich ein Schutzschild beschlossen, der die Unternehmen mittels Kostensenkungen (durch arbeits-, steuer-, und sozialrechtliche Maßnahmen) sowie kurzfristiger Darlehen in der Krise stabilisieren soll. Weitere Maßnahmen werden derzeit zusätzlich auf Länderebene entwickelt.
The High Court gave its ruling yesterday in the case of Discover (Northampton) Limited and others v Debenhams Retail Limited and others [2019] EWHC 2441 (Ch), rejecting four of the five grounds on which the Applicants disputed the validity of the company's Creditors Voluntary Arrangement ("CVA"), which was approved by creditors in May 2019.
Introduction The UK Government has announced that it will be introducing legislation under which the UK tax authorities1 will move up the creditor hierarchy in English insolvency proceedings2 in respect of certain taxes paid by
Introduction
In the recent case of Global Corporate Ltd v Hale , the Court of Appeal was asked to assess whether sums, described as “interim dividends”, paid to Mr. Hale (the “Respondent”) in his capacity as both a director and shareholder of Powerstation UK Limited (the “Company”), had been made in accordance with section 830 of the Companies Act 2006 (the “Act”) prior to the Company’s insolvency.
German insolvency proceedings expose company directors to high risks of personal liability. Claims brought on the basis of sec. 92(2), 93(3) German Companies Act (Aktiengesetz, AktG) and sec. 64 German Limited Liability Companies Act can have disastrous financial consequences. Damages can be in the millions. Therefore many company directors purchase directors’ and officers’ liability insurances (D&O insurance) to protect their personal assets.
The High Court has formally adopted new guidelines approved by the fledgling Judicial Insolvency Network (“JIN”) designed to encourage and enhance communication between courts where parallel insolvency proceedings have been commenced in different jurisdictions (the “Guidelines”).
A German insolvency administrator represented by Taylor Wessing claims back fees amounting to € 4.5 million from a leading German law firm paid by the insolvent company for restructuring advice. The claim is based on German rescission law.
In Re DTEK Finance BV,1 the English High Court decided that a change in the governing law of bonds from New York to English law, established a sufficient connection with the English jurisdiction for it to sanction the bonds' restructuring via a UK scheme of arrangement.
Background
The Supreme Court (unanimously dismissing the appeal in Trustees of Olympic Airlines SA Pension &Life Assurance Scheme v Olympic Airlines SA) has held that “economic activity” is central to the definition of “establishment” in the Insolvency Regulation1.