The German Federal Court of Justice (the Federal Court) has considered whether a so-called "weak" preliminary insolvency administrator, entrusted to continue business operations with the management during the preliminary proceeding, may take actions in the interest of these operations, where it is unclear whether the debtor has discontinued the business.

Background

According to the German Federal Court of Justice (the Court), a “related party” (nahestehende Person) within the meaning of German insolvency law includes in the case of a legal entity, an indirect shareholder, provided that it holds more than 25% of the shares. Here, the Court will assume that the legal entity has advance knowledge of the financial situation of its subsidiary.

Background

In a recent case before the Federal Court of Justice, an insolvency administrator was found to have neglected his duties of investigation in a particularly serious and reproachable manner.

Decision

The insolvency administrator had contested the offsetting of an investment subsidy by the creditor bank to balance the debtor’s accounts.

The focus of the decision was whether the insolvency administrator had made the contestation claim within the statutory limitation period. In Germany, this is usually three years and starts:

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.

Where a creditor believes that a debtor is insolvent, any “third-party application” that it makes for the insolvency of the debtor must be well substantiated.

Decision

The District Court of Hamburg recently considered an application for insolvency on grounds of illiquidity due to default in social security contributions.

A landmark decision of the German Federal Court (13 June 2006 – IX ZB 238/05) held that the illiquidity of a company could be assumed where it was in default for more than six months of social security contributions.

Der Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) hat am 29. Juni 2023 entschieden, dass ein Rechtsanwalt wegen Beratungsfehlern zu Zahlungen nach Insolvenzreife gegenüber dem Geschäftsführer haften kann, auch wenn er das Unternehmen und nicht die/den Geschäftsführer persönlich berät (IX ZR 56/22, ZInsO 2023, 1642).