This question is of particular importance considering further that the provisions of the Luxembourg Commercial Code may seem confusing when read literally and in isolation as to whether the period commences from the date of cessation of payments (cessation des paiements) alone, or the date of both the cessation of payments (cessation des paiements) and loss of creditworthiness (ébranlement du crédit) (i.e., the cumulative criteria for bankruptcy).

Key Takeaways

Genoteerd JANUARI 2021 NUMMER 138 WHOA - Wet homologatie onderhands akkoord - Inleiding - WHOA - hoofdlijnen - WHOA - bescherming schuldenaar en schuldeisers gedurende het akkoordtraject - Concluderend In deze uitgave Genoteerd 3 1 Inleiding 1.1 Op 1 januari 2021 is het wetsvoorstel wet homologatie onderhands akkoord (de WHOA) in werking getreden.

In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the election of a tenant, under Section 365(h) of the Bankruptcy Code, to remain in possession of real property governed by a rejected lease causes a third-party guaranty on another rejected agreement to remain in effect, to the extent such agreement and the lease are part of an integrated transaction.

Quoted WHOA - the Dutch scheme of arrangement JANUARY 2021 EDITION 138 - Introduction - WHOA – main features - WHOA – protection of the debtor and creditors during the ratification process - In conclusion In this edition Quoted 3 1 Introduction 1.1 On 1 January 2021 the draft bill on ‘court sanctioning private composition to avoid bankruptcy” (wet homologatie onderhands akkoord – WHOA, also known as the “Dutch scheme of arrangement”) has been enacted.

A recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals, Sutton v. Pilevsky held that federal bankruptcy law does not preempt state law tortious interference claims against non-debtors who participated in a scheme that caused a debtor—in this case a bankruptcy remote special purpose entity—to breach contractual obligations intended to ensure that the entity remains a Special Purpose Entity (SPE) and to facilitate the lenders’ enforcement of remedies upon a future bankruptcy filing, if any.

A recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals, Sutton v. Pilevsky held that federal bankruptcy law does not preempt state law tortious interference claims against non-debtors who participated in a scheme that caused a debtor—in this case a bankruptcy remote special purpose entity—to breach contractual obligations intended to ensure that the entity remains a Special Purpose Entity (SPE) and to facilitate the lenders’ enforcement of remedies upon a future bankruptcy filing, if any.

During this second wave of COVID, new lock-down measures have been taken. Belgium has already provided for numerous measures to mitigate the economic impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19). In addition, the Belgian authorities have again adopted a statutory moratorium imposing a stay on creditors’ right to enforce debts, terminate existing agreements early and initiate bankruptcy proceedings.

NOVEMBER 2020 Corona: directors’ duties and restructuring options in the BeNeLuCh Corona: directors’ duties and restructuring options in the BeNeLuCh I Introduction The rapid spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is leading to far-reaching health and safety measures all around the world. For people at home, but also for businesses, this creates a situation of great uncertainty. Certain governments have taken (extensive) measures to help businesses and its employees.

The Swiss Insurance Oversight Act has been subject to a partial revision in order to bring the protection of insurance customers in line with international developments and to improve the competitiveness of the Swiss insurance sector. The new provisions include a new insolvency restructuring regime, a customer categorisation making supervisory requirements proportional to the protection required by customers as well as new rules of conduct applicable to insurance undertakings and intermediaries.