The purpose of bankruptcy is twofold: (1) to provide the party filing for bankruptcy—the “debtor”—with a fresh start, and (2) to fairly distribute the debtor’s non-exempt assets to creditors in accordance with the priority scheme set forth in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This may sound relatively simple, but accomplishing these dual objectives can be difficult. One of the challenges in all bankruptcy cases is determining the scope and extent of assets that constitute “property of the estate” which are available for distribution to creditors.

Selección de las principales resoluciones en materia de Reestructuraciones e Insolvencias.

Nulidad de un despido colectivo realizado en la sucursal española de una sociedad sometida a un procedimiento de insolvencia alemán

Sentencia de la Sala de lo Social de la Audiencia Nacional de 30 de abril de 2018

Collective layoff voided at Spanish branch of a company subject to German insolvency proceedings

Judgment by the National Appellate Court (Labor Chamber) on April 30, 2018

An insolvency order by a German court on a company does not in itself authorize that company to carry out a collective layoff at its Spanish branch. The German company should have petitioned for a local insolvency proceeding on its Spanish branch to obtain authorization from the judge hearing the Spanish insolvency proceeding to conduct the collective layoff at its branch.

The purpose of bankruptcy is to provide for an orderly process by which a debtor’s assets can be fairly divided and distributed among creditors.

It is also meant to ensure that debtors can start fresh. Not all of a debtor’s assets are available to creditors—the Bankruptcy Code allows a debtor to keep certain assets safe in bankruptcy through various asset exemptions available under both state and federal law. One such exemption is Michigan’s bankruptcy-specific homestead exemption.

Selección de las principales resoluciones en materia de Reestructuraciones e Insolvencias.

No toda venta de unidad productiva en el seno de un concurso es una operación no sujeta a IVA

Sentencia del Tribunal Económico Administrativo Central de 21 de marzo de 2018

Not every sale of a unit of production in an insolvency proceeding is free of VAT

Central Economic-Administrative Tribunal decision of March 21, 2018

La crisis económica en la que se vio sumida España desde el año 2007, y de la que poco a poco el país se viene sobreponiendo, ha espoleado a los 'players' del mercado de reestructuraciones para salir de su zona de confort e introducirse en caminos hasta ahora apenas transitados en nuestro país.

Garrigues detectó que no existía una directriz clara que permitiera a los notarios expedir a favor de los fondos adquirentes de los créditos fallidos otra copia de la escritura de hipoteca “con efectos ejecutivos”.

On June 4, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling, No. 16-1215, which dealt with the dischargeability of debt in bankruptcy proceedings. The Court held that a statement about a single asset can be a “statement respecting the debtor’s financial condition” under section 523(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Background Facts

In a recent opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (the “Court”) ruled that penalties assessed by the state of Michigan against two debtors, stemming from fraud associated with the wrongful receipt of Michigan unemployment benefits, are non-dischargeable in Chapter 13 bankruptcy pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 523(a)(2).1

Background Facts