Fulltext Search

On August 16, 2021, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that an individual guarantor remained liable for more than $58 million in commercial debt, despite the individual’s claims that the lenders induced him to provide the guaranty under duress. See Lockwood International, Inc. v. Wells Fargo, NA, et al., Case No. 20-40324 (5th Cir. Aug. 16, 2021).

On April 29, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued its decision in Siegel v. Fitzgerald (In re Circuit City Stores, Inc.), Case No. 19-2240 (4th Cir. Apr. 29, 2021), upholding the constitutionality of a 2017 law that substantially increased the quarterly fees debtors are required to pay to the Office of the United States Trustee (the “US Trustee”) in chapter 11 bankruptcy cases.

On March 31, 2021, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada awarded attorney’s fees to a debtor under a Nevada fee-shifting statute for objecting to a time-barred proof of claim.1 The opinion serves as a warning that filing a proof of claim for time-barred debt may carry consequences other than claim disallowance despite the Supreme Court’s recent holding in Midland Fu

A year ago, many predicted that the COVID-19 stay-at-home orders and social distancing guidelines and their impact on the economy would result in a deluge of bankruptcy filings that could rival the Great Recession of 2008-2009. However, as we approach the one-year anniversary of former President Trump declaring the SARS-CoV-2 novel coronavirus a national emergency, that prediction has not come to pass.

On January 14, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton, __ U.S. __, 2021 WL 125106 (Jan. 14, 2021), which addresses issues related to the automatic stay and a creditor’s ability to retain property of a debtor’s estate upon the commencement of a bankruptcy case. The Fulton decision is a consolidation of four similar cases where the City of Chicago impounded debtor cars pre-petition in response to unpaid traffic tickets and fines. After filing for bankruptcy, each debtor requested that the City return the respective vehicles.

受疫情影响,英国越来越多的企业出现运营困难。虽然英国政府出台了多种补救措施,但仍会有很多企业将不可避免地面临破产。对因各种原因可能受到英国公司破产影响的中国公司或个人,本文将从英国破产法角度简要介绍英国公司破产程序、这些程序对于公司和普通债权人的保护,以及担任破产公司董事需要关注的问题。

一. 公司什么时候算破产?

英国的破产法规定主要来源于《1986年破产法》(Insolvency Act 1986)和《1986年破产规则》(Insolvency Rules 1986)。虽然《1986年破产法》没有给破产以明确的定义,但采用了"无力偿还债务"的概念。因此,在英国公司破产一般包含两种情况:一是公司没办法支付债务(现金流量破产 – Cash-flow insolvency),二是公司负债大于资产(资产负债表破产- Balance-sheet insolvency)。

现金流量破产一般表现为公司没办法支付其现有的债务。值得注意的是,即使公司可以支付现有债务,但如果没办法支付其在不远的未来产生的债务也将被视为破产。

Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, qualifying businesses may seek up to $10 million under the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for funding payroll and business expenses. The US Small Business Administration (SBA) guarantees the loans, and the full principal amount of the loans and any accrued interest may qualify for loan forgiveness. For many businesses, PPP loans have served as a lifeline during the COVID-19 pandemic.

On March 27, 2020, President Trump signed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act or the “CARES Act.”The legislation includes a historic $2 trillion aid package intended to stabilize the U.S. economy and provide disaster relief aid to American citizens and businesses impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The emergency aid package, which is by far the largest in American history, contains many provisions focused on providing relief. Among these are certain temporary amendments to Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”).