El nuevo sistema de subastas judiciales electrónicas continúa perfeccionándose tras varios meses desde su implantación en toda España, ofreciendo notables diferencias con respecto a las antiguas subastas presenciales.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently articulated a standard to determine what claims may be barred against a purchaser of assets "free and clear" of claims pursuant to section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code and highlighted procedural due process concerns with respect to enforcement.1 The decision arose out of litigation regarding certain defects, including the well-known "ignition switch defect," affecting certain GM vehicles. GM's successor (which acquired GM's assets in a section 363 sale in 2009) asserted that a "free and clear" provisi
El Tribunal Supremo ha aclarado en una reciente sentencia, de fecha 8 de junio de 2016, el orden de pago que corresponde a los honorarios de la administración concursal cuando la masa activa es insuficiente para el abono de la totalidad de los créditos contra la masa. Se distingue, a tal efecto, entre los que resultan estrictamente necesarios para hacer líquidos los activos del concursado y para gestionar el pago, de los que no tienen tal carácter.
1. IVA. Medidas de modernización en la Unión Europea
El pasado día 7 de abril la Comisión Europea comunicó la presentación de un Plan de Acción para revitalizar el actual sistema de IVA en la Unión Europea (UE), con el objetivo de hacerlo más sencillo, más impermeable al fraude y propicio para las empresas.
On March 29, 2016, the Second Circuit addressed the breadth and application of the Bankruptcy Code's safe harbor provisions in an opinion that applied to two cases before it. The court analyzed whether: (i) the Bankruptcy Code's safe harbor provisions preempt individual creditors' state law fraudulent conveyance claims; and (ii) the automatic stay bars creditors from asserting such claims while the trustee is actively pursuing similar claims under the Bankruptcy Code. In In re Tribune Co.
The District Court for the Central District of California recently held that an assignee that acquired rights to a terminated swap agreement was not a "swap participant" under the Bankruptcy Code and, therefore, could not invoke safe harbors based on that status to foreclose on collateral in the face of the automatic stay. [1] The court ruled that the assignee acquired only a right to collect payment under the swap agreement, not the assignor's rights under the Bankruptcy Code to exercise remedies without first seeking court approval.
Background
On May 21, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the "Third Circuit") held that in rare instances a bankruptcy court may approve a "structured dismissal"- that is, a dismissal "that winds up the bankruptcy with certain conditions attached instead of simply dismissing the case and restoring the status quo ante" - that deviates from the Bankruptcy Code's priority scheme. See Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. CIT Group/Business Credit Inc. (In re Jevic Holding Corp.), Case No.
Aereo, Inc. will be permitted to auction off its live television streaming technology to the highest bidder in accordance with a December 24 order, signed by a New York bankruptcy court judge, approving a deal between Aereo and the broadcast television networks on the sale process.
On October 31, 2014, Bankruptcy Judge Kaplan of the District of New Jersey addressed two issues critically important to intellectual property licensees and purchasers: (i) can a trademark licensee use section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code to keep licensed marks following a debtor-licensor’s rejection of a license agreement?; and (ii) can a “free and clear” sale of intellectual property eliminate any rights retained by a licensee? In re Crumbs Bake Shop, Inc., et al., 2014 WL 5508177 (Bankr. D.N.J. Oct. 31, 2014).
Pocas veces una legislación “moderna” (recordemos que el texto original de la Ley Concursal es de 2003) ha sido objeto de tanta modificación (en sus diez años de vigencia lleva más de 16 modificaciones). Lo que es seguro es que no será la última, de hecho en las próximas semanas verá la luz la Ley por la que se adoptan medidas urgentes en materia de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial (procedente del Real Decreto-ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo), un auténtico ejemplo de “reforma de la reforma”.