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.
Der BGH festigt und erweitert seine Rechtsprechung zum Kleinbeteiligtenprivileg im Kontext der insolvenzrechtlichen Anfechtung nach § 135 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 InsO.
The EU Commission has presented a draft directive on the mandatory inclusion of a "pre-pack proceeding" in national insolvency laws.
On 7 December 2022, the European Commission published a draft directive harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law with the aim of facilitating distressed M&A by reducing legal uncertainties in cross-border transactions.
The lack of harmonised insolvency laws has long been regarded as one of the greatest obstacles to the free movement of capital in the EU in general and to cross-border investments, insolvency proceedings and restructuring in particular.
Die EU-Kommission hat einen Richtlinienentwurf u.a. zur verpflichtenden Aufnahme eines „Pre-pack-Verfahrens“ in die nationalen Insolvenzgesetze vorgelegt.
Die Entscheidung des BGH zur Wirksamkeit insolvenzabhängiger Lösungsklauseln könnte der Grundstein einer neuen Linie in der Rechtsprechung werden.
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.