Introduction
Preventive measures
Out-of-court reorganisation
In-court reorganisation
Modernisation of bankruptcy
On 19 July 2023, the Luxembourg parliament passed bill no. 6539A on business preservation and modernisation of bankruptcy law, which aims to modernise Luxembourg’s insolvency laws, implementing EU Directive 2019/1023 of the European Parliament and the Council of 20 June 2019 on preventive restructuring frameworks (the 'Business Preservation and Insolvency Modernisation Act' or 'BPIM Act').
On 18 January 2017, EU Regulation n°655/2014 establishing a European Account Preservation Order ("EAPO") procedure became fully applicable in all Member States, with the exception of Denmark and the United Kingdom. |
On 18 January 2017, Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 (the "Regulation") will become fully applicable. It will henceforth be possible to obtain in any EU Member State, with the exception of Denmark and the United Kingdom, a preservation order for bank accounts of a debtor situated in another Member State.
The Regulation introduces at the European level a certain degree of transparency in terms of the debtor's assets.
According to the Court of Appeal, instead of entirely putting an end to bankruptcy operations, the decision to close the bankruptcy case only "suspends the bankruptcy process", while restoring individual rights to creditors. The appeal judges further indicated that "the bankruptcy regime stops existing, but the debtor remains under the threat of the re-opening of bankruptcy operations, which virtually survive".
La Cour d'appel de Luxembourg décide que le jugement de clôture de faillite pour insuffisance d'actifs ne met pas un terme aux opérations de faillite, mais en suspend les opérations.
La survie d'une société au terme des opérations de faillite diffère selon l'actif récupéré par le curateur.
Les sociétés commerciales dont les opérations sont clôturées pour insuffisance d'actif restent inscrites au registre de commerce.
In 2011, the Spanish legislator introduced the court-sanctioned refinancing agreement (‘Spanish Scheme’) in the Spanish insolvency system. While the introduction of the Spanish Scheme has been praised for providing new tools for debtors to reorganise out-of-court while addressing the collective action problem, certain of its provisions have made this instrument too rigid and, thus, ineffective for tackling Spanish restructurings.
Compensation of a debt made after the debtor’s bankruptcy declaration via the appropriation of securities pledged by virtue of a financial guarantee, is admitted.
The validity of a transaction assessed as “compensation” that was carried out after the bankruptcy declaration of the company in debt was questioned before the Supreme Court. The credit entity applied the value obtained from the reimbursement of an investment fund that had been pledged to secure a credit policy to reduce the debt.
JUDGEMENTS NO. 541/2012, OF OCTOBER 23, 2012, BY THE ZARAGOZA BRANCH OF THE COURT OF APPEALS, NOS. 413/2011, OF DECEMBER 19, AND 18/2012, OF JANUARY 18, BY THE BURGOS BRANCH OF THE COURT OF APPEALS, NO. 132/2012, OF APRIL 10, BY THE RULING OF THE VALENCIA BRANCH OF THE COURT OF APPEAL, AND NOS. 210/2012 AND 211/2012, BOTH OF JULY 20, BY THE ALICANTE COMMERCIAL COURT
Guarantees granted by a group company for securing a loan used to repay the insolvent party’s personal debts are detrimental to the insolvency estate. Article 10 of the Mortgage Market Act refers solely to mortgages that are already part of an issue of mortgage securities.