This article deals with the insolvency concept of the center of main interests (COMI) under the European Union insolvency legislation, in particular Regulation 2015/848 on insolvency proceedings (the Insolvency Regulation or the Regulation).
Pursuant to the Insolvency Regulation COMI is one of the central unified and autonomous concepts1 of the insolvent debtor, i.e. it is an insolvency concept and not a corporate law or tax concept.
The COVID-19 crisis has emphasised the importance of having performant insolvency proceedings. As of now, new measures are in force which aim to optimise the judicial reorganisation procedure. We elaborate on the three most relevant changes.
Belgian insolvency law organises two main types of insolvency proceedings: bankruptcy (faillissement/faillite) which is a winding-up proceeding and judicial reorganisation (gerechtelijke reorganisatie/réorganisation judiciaire) which is a safeguard proceeding.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s denial of a consumer’s Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan that proposed a “partial surrender” of a cross-collateralized loan.
In so ruling, the Fifth Circuit held that the text of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(5) allows debtors to select a different option “with respect to each allowed secured claim,” but it does not allow a debtor to select different options for different collateral securing the same claim.
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).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a borrower’s petition seeking relief under the federal All Writs Act for purported violations of the automatic bankruptcy stay in continued foreclosure proceedings and purported violations of the borrower’s rights to remove the state court proceedings to the bankruptcy court.
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.
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.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that loans incurred by a debtor to pay university tuition were “qualified education loans” under the Bankruptcy Code and thus were not dischargeable.
In so ruling, the Sixth Circuit rejected the debtor’s arguments that:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that property in which a debtor’s dependent son lived part-time with his father qualified for the so-called homestead exemption contained in section 522(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, regardless of state law.
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.