Fulltext Search

On 7th February 2024, Mr Justice Richards heard closing submissions in the English High Court for a contested sanction hearing for Aggregate Group’s Part 26A restructuring plan. This hearing presented one of the first opportunities to analyse how the Adler decision will affect restructuring plans going forward.

In March 2022, the International Monetary Fund (the “IMF”) assessed Sri Lanka’s public debt to be unsustainable after the country entered the pandemic with thin reserve buffers, high debt levels, and no fiscal space. The IMF’s determination prompted Sri Lanka to begin restructuring its debt the following month. As part of that process, Sri Lanka adopted an “Interim Policy” of suspending debt service on the following affected debts:

引子

将于2024年7月1日正式施行的《公司法》(以下简称“《新公司法》”)第二百三十二条对于“清算义务人”及“怠于履行清算义务责任”(以下简称“怠于清算责任”)进行了重大修订,无论是股份公司还是有限公司,董事都将成为法定的唯一清算义务人。该条规定的更新无疑将引发司法解释及其他配套规定的新一轮重大修改,并将对司法实践中本就争议颇多的怠于清算责任案件的裁判规则再次带来冲击。

回望我国立法沿革,在超过三十年的时间中,对于“清算义务人”及“怠于清算责任”的规定修订之繁多、体系之冲突、解释之模糊,遍观整个民商事法律体系都属罕见,并由此引发了大量“类案不同判”的现象。鉴此,笔者将结合《新公司法》的最新修改,对涉及“清算义务人”和“怠于清算责任”的规定进行系统回顾及梳理,并以此为基础对《新公司法》的新修亮点及溯及力问题进行初步分析,抛砖引玉,并求教于业界。

一、《新公司法》之前我国法律对于“清算义务人”与“怠于清算责任”的立法沿革

(一)2005年《公司法》修订之前的相关规定

On 23 January 2024, the Court of Appeal handed down its much anticipated judgment[1] on the appeal of the Adler restructuring plan pursuant to Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (“RP”), which was sanctioned by the High Court on 12 April 2023

As we reported in a previous blog the German legislator in November 2022 introduced the Law on the Temporary Adaption of Restructuring and Insolvency Law Provisions to Mitigate the Consequences of the Crisis (SanInsKG).

2018年以来,选择以庭外重组方式化解债务风险的大型民营企业逐渐变多,同时在实践中,为了固化庭外债务重组协议之效力,越来越多企业根据自身需要,寻求以庭外重组与庭内重组相结合的、综合性化解债务危机的路径。在这样的现实背景下,对庭外债务重组与庭内重组程序的衔接及组合运用进行研究便显得十分必要了。本文将结合我国相关政策规定和案例实践,探讨庭外债务重组与庭内重组程序衔接的合理性、可行性以及两者进行衔接的模式。

一、庭外重组与庭内重组程序的现实需求

庭外重组与庭内重组(包括破产重整和破产和解)均为化解债务风险的路径。庭内重组通过破产法规定及司法权力介入等形式,赋予了重整计划或和解协议“多数决”的强制约束力,以及解封解押等的强制执行力。但庭外重组实质是债务人与主要债权人私下自愿协商,或者在中立第三人主持下达成债务调整合意的过程,达成的合意不具有司法强制执行力。

On 23 September 2023, the new Act on Preventive Restructuring (284/2003 Coll.) entered into effect in the Czech Republic (the “Czech Preventive Restructuring Act”), incorporating the EU Directive 2019/1023 on preventive restructuring frameworks in the Czech legal environment.

There are a few things that we can be almost certain of in 2024, and others are things to add to the watchlist, but with a potential change in government on the cards, there are likely to be a few curveballs thrown into the mix that none of us can predict.

Development of Restructuring Plans (RPs)

The judgment handed down in the matter of CB&I UK Ltd suggests that the English Courts will not expedite or truncate sanction hearing timetables to accommodate requests from companies which have applied for a restructuring plan under Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (“Restructuring Plan”) unless there are good reasons for doing so.

There are a few things that we can be almost certain of in 2024, and others are things to add to the watchlist, but with a potential change in government on the cards, there are likely to be a few curveballs thrown into the mix that none of us can predict.

Increasing Insolvencies