Mit außerordentlichem Engagement treibt das Bundesministerium für Justiz und Verbraucherschutz (BMJV) aktuell das Gesetz zur Abmilderung der Folgen der COVID-19-Pandemie im Zivil-, Insolvenz- und Strafverfahrensrecht voran. Weniger als zwei Wochen nach Beginn der weitreichenden Einschränkungen des öffentlichen Lebens und auch der Wirtschaft in Deutschland aufgrund der COVID-19-Pandemie soll es nun verabschiedet werden.

As the nation hunkers down to combat the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bankruptcy courts throughout the country have moved quickly to implement procedures to preserve access to the courts while limiting in-person interaction during the crisis. Each court’s specific COVID-19 procedures are different, but they largely prohibit in-person hearings, recognize the need for flexibility and adjournments for non-emergent matters whenever possible, and encourage the creative use of technology to allow as many matters to go forward as scheduled, including evidentiary hearings.

The Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) now implements, with great commitment and unprecedented speed, what it has generally announced on 16 March 2020 (see also The four pillar protective governmental shield for Germany):

The Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) now implements, with great commitment and unprecedented speed, what it has generally announced on 16 March 2020: 

Das Bundesministerium für Justiz und Verbraucherschutz (BMJV) lässt nun mit enormem Einsatz und mit wohl einmaliger Geschwindigkeit seiner vom 16. März 2020 Akündigung Taten folgen (siehe auch: Vier Säulen Schutzschild für Deutschland):

Noch in dieser Woche sollen

The German government announced that it will expand the KfW financing programme.

Social distancing. Elbow bumps. Flatten the curve. These are the new phrases and behaviors we have learned to avoid exposure to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). This epic struggle forces us to reexamine and reevaluate our daily habits, lifestyles and customs as we work collectively to minimize the harm to our families, friends and neighbors throughout the United States.

On February 25, 2020, in Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, No. 18-1269 (U.S. 2020), the U.S. Supreme Court effectively ruled that the so-called “Bob Richards rule” should not be used to determine which member of a group of corporations filing a consolidated federal income tax return is entitled to a federal income tax refund.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali recently ruled in the Chapter 11 case of Pacific Gas & Electric (“PG&E”) that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) has no jurisdiction to interfere with the ability of a bankrupt power utility company to reject power purchase agreements (“PPAs”).

We’ve all heard it said a million times - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. But does that age-old maxim apply to a bankrupt customer offering to pay you 100% of your unsecured claim through a “prepackaged” bankruptcy or under a critical vendor program? The answer can be complicated.

This article explores what it means to be “unimpaired” and paid in full in prepackaged bankruptcies and under critical vendor programs and outlines some of the potential pitfalls that can be faced by unsecured creditors under these scenarios.