Key Takeaways
In response to the proposal by the EU Commission on 7 December 2022 that an EU Directive be issued to harmonise certain aspects of insolvency law, this article provides a look into one of the main topics of the draft directive – pre-pack reorganisation proceedings as regulated in Serbia, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which are candidate countries for accession to the EU.
In response to the proposal by the EU Commission on 7 December 2022 that an EU Directive be issued to harmonise certain aspects of insolvency law, this article provides a look into one of the main topics of the draft directive – pre-pack reorganisation proceedings as regulated in Serbia, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which are candidate countries for accession to the EU.
On 7 December 2022, the European Commission published a proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council harmonising certain aspects of the insolvency law. The intention of this Directive Proposal is to make insolvency proceedings more predictable and efficient within the EU.
Most importantly, the Directive Proposal introduces a mandatory inclusion of a new restructuring instrument to Slovenian insolvency law: what is known as a ‘pre-pack proceeding’, which is a fast-track liquidation proceeding that:
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.
On 7 December 2022, the European Commission published a proposal for a directive for the harmonisation of certain aspects of insolvency laws across EU member states. One of the key elements of this proposal is the introduction of harmonised pre-pack proceedings aimed at increasing the efficiency of business sales in insolvency proceedings.
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.