En la SAP de Madrid (secc. 28ª) de 7 de diciembre de 2012 y la SAP de Barcelona (secc. 15ª) de 4 de octubre de 2012 se discutía la calificación concursal de un crédito que había sido calificado por la administración concursal como subordinado por entender que la sociedad acreedora pertenecía al mismo grupo de sociedades que la concursada. En ambos casos las Audiencias realizan un análisis del concepto de grupo a efectos concursales antes y después de la reforma de la Ley Concursal introducida por la Ley 38/2011.

Se rechaza la inscripción del nombramiento de liquidador acordado por la junta general ante la aparición de un activo sobrevenido de una sociedad cuya hoja registral había sido cerrada por el juzgado de lo mercantil ante la conclusión del concurso por inexistencia de bienes.

La DGRN se cuestiona si es posible inscribir el acuerdo de nombramiento de liquidador de una sociedad cuya hoja registral fue cerrada por auto del Juez de lo Mercantil que decretó la conclusión del concurso de acreedores de la sociedad por inexistencia de bienes²⁸.

La apreciación de mala fe a efectos de subordinación del crédito de la contraparte a la restitución en caso de rescisión exige, además de conocer la situación de insolvencia o proximidad a la insolvencia del deudor, la concurrencia de un aspecto subjetivo (conciencia de que se afecta negativamente –perjuicio- a los demás acreedores) y de un aspecto objetivo (valorativo de la conducta del acreedor, consistente en que esta sea merecedora de la repulsa ética en el tráfico jurídico).

La caducidad del cargo de administrador se produce ope legis, sin necesidad de que acceda al Registro Mercantil ningún documento que lo constate. En estos casos, a diferencia del cese o la separación, el inicio del plazo de prescripción de la acción de responsabilidad contra el administrador comienza desde el momento en que deba considerarse caducado el cargo.

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York held that it had subject matter jurisdiction over a bankruptcy trustee’s adversary proceeding against the bankrupt entity’s insurer because the policy and policy proceeds were part of the policyholder’s bankruptcy estate.  EMS Financial Services, LLC. v. Federal Ins. Co., 2013 WL 64755 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y.  Jan. 4, 2013).

Applying California law, a California appellate court has held, in an unpublished opinion, that a judgment for reimbursement against an insured law firm was properly amended to name the sole equity partner of that law firm in light of his “pervasive” involvement in the underlying litigation and coverage litigation and his direction of such litigation in light of the fact that he knew the law firm was dissolved and had no assets.  Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. L.M. Ross Law Group LLP, 2012 WL 6555545 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2012). 

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, applying California law, has concluded that it should exercise jurisdiction under the federal Declaratory Judgment Act to determine the availability of coverage for a written demand and has held that the related coverage action should not be stayed in favor of potential future underlying litigation between the Federal Deposition Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the insureds because the outcome of the coverage litigation would not be dependent on resolution of disputed facts in such a future action.  Progressiv

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, applying Texas law, has held that a settlement agreement resolving coverage litigation released the insurer’s obligation for defense costs for certain claims tendered for coverage under a subsequent policy.  Nat’l Heritage Found., Inc. v. Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co., 2012 WL 5331570 (E.D. Va. Oct. 25, 2012).

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nebraska has held that an insurer may make settlement payments for claims against a debtor’s directors and officers where any claims of the debtor are subordinate to those of the directors and officers under the terms of the policy.  The court stated that under these circumstances “the issue of whether the policies are property of the bankruptcy estate is irrelevant.”  In re TierOne Corp., 2012 WL 4513554 (Bankr. D. Neb. Oct. 2, 2012).

Explaining the Subsequent New Value and Contemporaneous Exchange Defenses to Avoidable Preferences

Avoidable Preferences

The bankruptcy code allows a debtor, trustee or other estate representative to recover certain payments or other transfers (such as judgment liens and attachments) to creditors made within 90 days of the date a bankruptcy case was filed.