On December 14, 2020, Judge Marvin Isgur of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, issued an important decision in the CEC Entertainment, Inc. (Chuck E. Cheese) bankruptcy case, Case No. 20-33163, denying the Debtors’ motion to abate their obligations to pay post-petition rent due to government shutdown orders issued as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Memorandum Opinion [Dkt. No. 1492].

In a case litigated by the authors, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held in In re Marzieh Bastanipour, Case No. 20-1373 (7th Cir. June 10, 2020) that Chapter 13 debtors are not permitted in forma pauperis fee waivers absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances.

In 2018, the Debtor, Marzieh Bastanipour, filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois. This was the third Chapter 13 petition filed by the Debtor since 2013.

Force majeure clauses and the doctrines of impossibility and/or impracticability remain among the most-discussed legal topics of the COVID-19 pandemic. Courts across the country, finally open, are grappling with those issues and giving some insight as to how these topics may play out in future cases.

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。

Seyfarth Synopsis: In acquiring a company in bankruptcy, there is often a tendency to think this guarantees the purchaser will be “free and clear” of any liability (including so-called “successor liability”). This is not necessarily so with wage and hour liability, particularly if the purchaser merely continues to operate virtually the same business that was acquired.

Courts continue to address constitutional and statutory challenges to COVID-19-related legislation and governmental orders. Among them, courts are examining eligibility for PPP loans under the CARES Act, as well as the constitutionality of “stay at home” and similar orders restricting activities.

PPP loans under the CARES Act

The COVID-19 pandemic and the drastic measures taken in an effort to mitigate its adverse impact have sent shock waves throughout the US and global financial systems. COVID-19 and measures including travel bans, shelter-in-place orders and widespread business closures have caused precipitous changes in customer spending and demand, supply chain disruptions, sharp declines in revenue and other operational challenges across a wide range of economic sectors. Businesses worldwide now confront unprecedented and mounting challenges and distress.

We have previously written about the effects of COVID-19 on the way we currently work, as well as how businesses need to adapt to protect their trade secrets, customer goodwill, and other interests. In ordinary times, emergency injunctive relief is often the first resort for a business after discovering its trade secrets were stolen or customer relationships are at risk.

On March 31, 2020, the Rhode Island Superior Court announced the creation of its COVID-19 Receivership Program. The Program establishes a unique non-liquidating receivership calendar intended to assist Rhode Island businesses that are unable to pay their debts as they become due as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. The Program is designed to give struggling businesses time to obtain emergency funding under the CARES Act or other source, to resume paying its ongoing obligations under Court supervision, and repay its prepetition debt.

During challenging economic times, Bankruptcy Courts serve an essential governmental and financial function. The COVID-19 outbreak has forced closures of businesses and governmental entities throughout the country, resulting in a cascade of financial distress across virtually every economic sector. The nation’s courts have not been immune from disruptions. Nearly all State Courts and Federal District Courts in major metropolitan areas have suspended non-emergency civil proceedings.