Banking & Finance Banking & Finance Juni/June 2017 4 | Editorial Fokus 6 | Blockchain – (auch) eine Innovation im Bereich der Wertpapierabwicklung? 9 | Deutschland reformiert das Insolvenzanfechtungsrecht – zumindest ein wenig 11 | Die Auswirkungen der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung auf das Bankenwesen Finance 13 | Bundesgerichtshof befasst sich mit dinglichen Upstream-Sicherheiten – Auswirkungen auf Limitation Languages?

On July 16, 2014, the Uniform Law Commission (the “Commission”) approved a series of changes to the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (the “UFTA”). The UFTA had previously been adopted by most states in the country, including Michigan. The Commission’s amendments included changing the name of the law from the UFTA to the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (the “UVTA”).

What happens in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case when a creditor files a proof of claim involving a debt for which the statute of limitations to collect the debt has run? More specifically, does the filing of such a claim violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the “Act”)? That’s the issue considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in its recent decision in the case of Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson. 1

In a recent decision, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit (the “Court”) considered the issue of asset “abandonment” in a Chapter 7 case[1]. The Court reversed the bankruptcy court’s decision to allow the Chapter 7 trustee to compromise a claim that the debtor argued the trustee had abandoned.

Background

Anders als die Insolvenzordnung, sieht die EU-Richtlinie zum vorinsolvenzlichen Sanierungsverfahren keine Einschränkung der Arbeitnehmerrechte vor.

In the case of Susan G. Brown v. Douglas Ellmann [1], the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (the “Sixth Circuit”) recently affirmed a bankruptcy court’s decision to deny a Chapter 7 debtor’s proposed exemptions for the value of redemption rights she enjoyed under Michigan law related to the sale of a property she surrendered to the bankruptcy estate.

Background

Banking & Finance Banking & Finance Dezember / December 2016 4 | Editorial Fokus 6 | Verschärfung der Regulierung auf dem sog. Zweitmarkt – Anlageberatung und -vermittlung von Vermögensanlagen ab 2017 KWG-erlaubnispflichtig 8 | Anforderungen an ein schlüssiges Sanierungskonzept zur Verhinderung einer Insolvenzanfechtung aus Sicht der Gläubiger Aufsichtsrecht 10 | Zusätzliche Anforderungen an die Ausgestaltung einer Limitation Language aufgrund des Asset-Stripping-Verbots gemäß § 292 Kapitalanlagegesetzbuch (KAGB)?

Many bankruptcy cases involve adversary proceedings in which creditors seek to have certain debts deemed nondischargeable. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (the “District Court”) recently considered, on appeal, whether the Bankruptcy Court properly held that a debt owed by a debtor (the “Debtor”) to the State of Michigan Unemployment Insurance Agency (the “Agency”) is dischargeable in a Chapter 13 case.1

The Bankruptcy Code grants a trustee (or a debtor in possession) certain “avoidance” powers to recover payments to creditors made shortly before a bankruptcy filing where the payment gave the creditor more than other, similarly situated, creditors would receive through the bankruptcy process.

OLG Naumburg verneint Haftung der Organe eines insolventen Zeitarbeitsunternehmens gegenüber den Einzugsstellen.

Bislang ist von der Rechtsprechung nicht abschließend geklärt, ob eine persönliche Haftung der Organe eines Zeitarbeitsunternehmens wie der Geschäftsführung gegenüber den Einzugsstellen in Betracht kommt.