On March 7, 2014 the Spanish Government approved the Royal Decree Law 4/2014 adopting urgent measures on debt refinancing and restructuring ("Real Decreto-ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes en material de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial" or "RDL 4/2014").  

Overview

Act 22/2003, of July 9 ("Spain's Insolvency Act"), has been recently amended to include a new chapter regulating the so-called "insolvency mediators" and the extrajudicial settlement of payments ("ESP") as a form of negotiating the debts of the entrepreneurs.

The reform has been introduced by Act 14/2013, of September 27, on entrepreneurs and their internationalization (hereinafter, the "

Act

On March 7, 2014 the Spanish Government approved the Royal Decree Law 4/2014 adopting urgent measures on business debt refinancing and restructuring ("Real Decreto-ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes en material de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial" or "RDL 4/2014"). The aim of this new regulation is the implementation of legal measures necessary to achieve the viable restructuring of debtors.

A recent decision from the Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas concludes that directors of a non-debtor general partner may owe fiduciary duties to a limited partnership debtor in bankruptcy whether or not such duties exist (or have been disclaimed) under the debtor's and general partner's organizational documents or applicable state law.[1]  In deciding whether to dismiss an involuntary petition filed against Houston Regional Sports Network, L.P.

Spanish Secondary Regulation develops the Spanish Mediation Law dated July 6th 2012 (hereinafter the "Regulation") published in the Official Gazette last December 27th 2013. 

Mediators' training

I)     Introduction

As highlighted by the 2008-2009 crisis, the insolvency of sub-suppliers raises important challenges. Automotive parts suppliers may need to find an alternative sub-supplier at short notice or may have to take over the production of certain parts themselves, which often requires a recovery of the tools that were provided to the sub-supplier. Both scenarios raise difficult legal issues.

In a recent landmark ruling, the UK Supreme Court deliberated on the question of whether an overseas defendant had to have submitted to the jurisdiction under common law before a foreign bankruptcy order would be recognised and enforced in England. Richard Keady and Jay Qin of Bird & Bird consider the practical implications of the decision and the significance it may have on practitioners going forward.

On August 2, 2012, in the case ofIn re MBS Management Services, Inc.,¹ the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that a retail electricity agreement with a real estate management company constituted a forward contract protected by the “safe harbor” provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (“Bankruptcy Code”).