Welcome to the second article in this amazing series which looks at what you can do to try to extract money from a stubborn business debtor.
In the first article I looked at the potential benefits and detriments of issuing a County Court Claim. This time I will take a step back and look at what you could do prior to going to Court with your completed forms and a large cheque for the ever-growing Court fee. You can read this article here.
Employers scored a big victory in In re Trump Entertainment Resorts, a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, which held that a debtor-employer can terminate their obligations under an expired Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and implement the terms of a final offer.
Click here to view image.
I am sure many of you may be aware already that as of the 1st October 2015 the Bankruptcy Limit has increased to £5,000 whilst a Winding up Order remains the same at £750.00.
The limit debtor's can apply for a Debt Relief Order has also been increased from £15,000 to £20,000.
While there are smart ways to avoid the debt collection process, sometimes you have to hire a professional. After all, you have your business to run and dealing with delinquent accounts can be draining on your resources, time and patience. That said, not every debt collection specialist is created equal and not every company will be right for your unique business. Here are a few things you should consider when selecting a partner in the process.
Do the Research
The Issue and Background
A recent court ruling highlights the need for robust governance practices for nonprofits, particularly those facing financial difficulties. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a jury’s award of $2.25 million in compensatory damages against former directors and officers of a bankrupt nonprofit corporation - personal liability for breach of fiduciary duties and “deepening insolvency.”1 The court also affirmed punitive damages against the officer defendants, but vacated the award of punitive damages against the director defendants.
On Monday, November 17, 2014, the United States Supreme Court agreed to decide a critical issue for mortgage lenders and secondary market investors, whether Section 506(d) of the Bankruptcy Code allows a Chapter 7 debtor to “strip off” a junior mortgage lien when the outstanding senior debt exceeds the current value of the senior lien. Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, No. 13-1421, 2014 WL 2207208 (U.S. Nov. 17, 2014); Bank of America, N.A. v. Toledo-Cardona, No. 14-163, 2014 WL 3965212 (U.S. Nov. 17, 2014).
Contexte
En février 2012, la fermeture des hauts fourneaux de Florange divise la classe politique. Le président François Hollande s’engage alors à ce que désormais tout société voulant mettre fin à son activité en France soit soumise à l’obligation de rechercher un repreneur.
Background
In February 2012, following the highly political closing of the Florange site, a steel production plant, President François Hollande vowed that going forward any company wanting to close down its operations in France would have an obligation to first look for a purchaser.
Given the unfortunate reputation of French courts for awarding substantial damages to employees for unfair terminations, US corporations with operations in France are anxious to limit their financial and legal exposure in case of litigation initiated by their French workforce. How to achieve this efficiently is a far from rhetorical question as French employees frequently pull in the US parent company as a named defendant. The recent decision of the French Supreme Court [Cass. Soc.