This blog entry will be the first in a new, ongoing series of entries in the “Bankruptcy Protector” that will attempt to familiarize new attorneys and non-bankruptcy practitioners with the basic concepts of bankruptcy law of which all lawyers should be aware.
The Bankruptcy Protector
Background
The crisis exit treatment procedure has been introduced to provide a temporary judicial procedure for debtors encountering difficulties related to the pandemic and the financing of their activities. This excludes debtors that are structurally in distress.
The procedure enables debtors to adopt a repayment plan within a three-month period to resolve the company's financial difficulties. The procedure is subject to the rules governing judicial reorganisation proceedings with certain adaptations and exclusions.
Hong Kong courts recently recognised reorganisation proceedings in Mainland China for the first time in Re HNA Group Co Limited [2021] HKCFI 2897, further enhancing the cooperation between Mainland China and Hong Kong in cross-border insolvency matters.
The facts
In 2021, the German legislator changed the rules of conduct by inserting a further section into the German Insolvency Code (InsO).
Background
Background
The bill implementing the EU Preventive Restructuring Directive – a means of financial relief for entrepreneurs (companies only) – should have originally been enacted and introduced last year. As the bill has not yet been approved by the Chamber of Deputies, the deadline has been moved to July 2022.
What's new?
The new government has amended the original proposal, drafted by its predecessor.
The Bankruptcy Protector
Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3002.1 was implemented to protect debtors from unanticipated deficiencies in residential mortgage payments following a chapter 13 discharge, and the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Puerto Rico’s recent opinion in In re Feliciano Figueroa[1] illustrates how detrimental the rule can be to inattentive mortgage holders.
A Texas bankruptcy court’s decision earlier this year to dismiss the National Rifle Association’s (“NRA”) chapter 11 bankruptcy case as a bad faith filing illustrates the perils of a poorly planned chapter 11 filing, and highlights the need, even in crisis situations, to establish solid objectives and develop a sound strategy prior to seeking relief under the Bankruptcy Code. In re Nat’l Rifle Ass’n of Am., 628 B.R. 262 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2021).
In John Doyle Construction v Erith Contractors, the Court of Appeal has further considered the interrelation of insolvency and adjudication, providing guidance on the circumstances in which an adjudication award might be enforceable by a company in liquidation.
The key takeaways
Jurisdiction