Het faillissement van Heiploeg uit 2014 is een bron van principiële geschillen en procedures. Deze Heiploeg-uitspraak werpt de vraag op onder welke voorwaarden een (door de Europese Commissie) aan Heiploeg opgelegde kartelboete kan worden verhaald op een (in dit geval gewezen) bestuurder. In de literatuur is vanuit meerdere invalshoeken de nodige aandacht besteed aan de mogelijkheid om op grond van het mededingingsrecht een boete op te leggen aan bestuurders en andere feitelijk leidinggevenden.

Recently, in In re Moon Group Inc., a bankruptcy court said no, but the district court, which has agreed to review the decision on an interlocutory appeal, seems far less sure.

Aanleiding en inhoud TWTT

Een turboliquidatie is de ontbinding op eigen initiatief van een rechtspersoon, waarbij – als de rechtspersoon op het tijdstip van ontbinding geen baten heeft – het tijdstip van de ontbinding samenvalt met de beëindiging van de rechtspersoon. In dat geval hoeft er dus niet te worden vereffend, want er zijn geen baten om te vereffenen. Let op: het voorgaande geldt dus ook als de rechtspersoon nog wel lasten heeft.

Key Takeaways

Key Takeaways

Yes, says the Delaware Bankruptcy Court in the case of CII Parent, Inc., cementing the advice routinely given by bankruptcy counsel to borrowers in default. We always counsel borrower clients in default of the risk associated with lenders taking unilateral actions pre-filing, stripping debtors of valuable options and assets. Thus, we normally recommend to always obtain a forbearance and undertake the preparations required to file a bankruptcy petition immediately upon forbearance termination, although whether or not to file depends on variety of factors that should be considered.

The Second Circuit recently held that a non-party to an assumed executory contract is not entitled to a cure payment (although it may be so entitled if is a third-party beneficiary of the contract). The result would have seemed obvious to bankruptcy practitioners. So, what in the world made the party pursuing payment take this to the Second Circuit? Well, surprisingly, as the Second Circuit decision shows, the answer is not found in the plain text of the Bankruptcy Code. And while it was argued prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, No. 21-908, 598 U.S.

A mortgage loan repurchase facility (more casually referred to as a "repo") is a financing structure commonly utilized to finance mortgage loans. These facilities are utilized by both residential and commercial mortgage loan originators and aggregators to finance mortgage loans that they originate or acquire. The structure is favored by liquidity providers in the mortgage loan finance arena due to its preferential "safe harbor" treatment under the United States Bankruptcy Code (the "Bankruptcy Code"), as further described below.

Following a number of recent high-profile collapses of banks in Europe and the United States (notably, Credit Suisse, Silicon Valley Bank, Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank), not only their investors but also their clients may be considering their position under financing arrangements and applicable insolvency law.

Here are five steps that corporate borrowers can take to protect themselves against the fall-out of their financing banks’ insolvency:

Lenders often attempt to limit what a borrower can do outside the ordinary course of business by negotiating contractual protections. Some of these provisions are designed to make the borrowers bankruptcy remote by, for example, requiring the borrower’s Board to include an independent director whose consent is required for a bankruptcy filing. Others, as was the case we discuss here, however, go further by including contractual rights that limit a borrower’s ability to file for bankruptcy without the lender’s consent.