In an appeal of a bankruptcy court’s decision, a district court judge recently addressed the treatment of the “straddle year” for federal income tax under the Bankruptcy Code, which “does not appear to have been decided by any appellate court.” In re Affirmative Ins. Holdings Inc. United States v. Beskrone, No. 15-12136-CSS, 2020 WL 4287375, at *1 (D. Del. July 27, 2020).

Our February 26 post [1] reported on the first case dealing with the question whether a debtor in a pending Chapter 11 case may redesignate it as a case under Subchapter V, [2] the new subchapter of Chapter 11 adopted by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA”), which became effective on February 19.

Section 550 of the Bankruptcy Code provides that, when a transfer is avoided under one of several other sections of the Code, a trustee may recover “the property transferred, or, if the court so orders, the value of such property” from “the initial transferee of such transfer,” “the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made,” or “any immediate or mediate transferee of such initial transferee.” 11 U.S.C. § 550(a).

This post provides a quick primer on the administrative expense claims. These claims are entitled to priority for actual and necessary goods and services supplied to a debtor in bankruptcy. For a claim to qualify for administrative expense status, a debtor must request that the claimant provide goods and services post-petition or induce the claimant to do so. The goods or services must result in a benefit to the bankruptcy estate. And the claimant bears the burden of proof that a claim qualifies for priority treatment under 11 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(A).

Recent werden twee koninklijke besluiten (KB nr. 45 en nr. 46) gepubliceerd waarin enkele bijkomende steunmaatregelen voorzien worden in het kader van de COVID-19-uitbraak. Deze voorzien enerzijds de mogelijkheid voor de opname van voltijds corona-ouderschapsverlof en anderzijds enkele nuttige maatregelen tot herverdelen van de arbeid, waaronder het corona-tijdskrediet, voor ondernemingen in herstructurering of moeilijkheden.

Uitbreiding corona-ouderschapsverlof

On 17 April 2020 the Supreme Court handed down an important interim judgment concerning the pre-pack bankruptcy of Heiploeg. In this judgment, the Supreme Court holds that the rules on the Transfer of Undertakings (as explained further below) do not apply to a restart following bankruptcy. In addition, the Supreme Court holds that the rules on the Transfer of Undertakings do not always apply in the case of a restart that has been prepared by means of a pre-pack. The Supreme Court takes the view that in the pre-pack bankruptcy of Heiploeg these rules do not apply.

The restructuring & insolvency Q&A series provides a comprehensive overview of some of the key points of law and practice of the regulatory environment in Luxembourg. Today's chapter focuses on tips and traps.

What are your top tips for a smooth restructuring and what potential sticking points would you highlight?

Where Luxembourg holding or bond issuing companies are key to a distressed group, the following points are often misunderstood or considered too late, thus jeopardising a smooth restructuring;

On 19 June 2020, following the consultation, the Federal Council adopted the dispatch on the partial revision of the Swiss Federal Banking Act (Bundesgesetz über die Banken und Sparkassen, Bankengesetz). The legislative amendment intends to strengthen customer and depositor protection and promote system stability.

The partial revision focuses on three main areas: (i) the restructuring proceedings for banks, (ii) deposit insurances and (iii) intermediated securities.

Foreign bankruptcy and insolvency decrees generally remain without legal effect in Switzerland. A foreign bankruptcy or insolvency decree must first be recognized by the competent Swiss court. In a newly published decision, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court further clarified the recently revised provisions governing the recognition and the following procedure.

Introduction and background

The restructuring & insolvency Q&A series provides a comprehensive overview of some of the key points of law and practice of the regulatory environment in Luxembourg. Today's chapter focuses on trends and predictions.

How would you describe the current restructuring and insolvency landscape and prevailing trends in your jurisdiction? Are any new developments anticipated in the next 12 months, including any proposed legislative reforms?