PREPACKAGED INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION FOR MSMEs – FIRST STEP TOWARDS A LONG AWAITED LEGAL FRAMEWORk
On April 12, 2021, Automotores Gildemeister SpA of Santiago, Chile filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 21-10685) along with several affiliates. The corporate minutes accompanying the petition indicate that the company contemplates a prepackaged chapter 11 filing.
Late on April 5, 2021, TECT Aerospace Group Holdings, Inc., along with certain affiliates that manufacture high precision components and assemblies for the aerospace industry, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-10670).
On April 5, 2021, The Collected Group, LLC, along with certain affiliates that design, distribute, and retail three contemporary, consumer-inspired, apparel lifestyle brands: Joie, Equipment, and Current/Elliott, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-10663).
On March 30, 2021, Houston-based retail power provider Entrust Energy, Inc., filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (Case No. 21-31070). The company reports $100 to $500 million in assets and $50 to $100 million in liabilities.
On March 29, 2021, AeroCentury Corp., a Calif.-based publicly traded aircraft operating lessor and finance company specializing in leasing regional aircraft and engines to regional airlines and commercial users in 15 countries, announced it and certain of its subsidiaries filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-10636).
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) on 13 November 2020 issued the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) (Fourth Amendment) Regulations, 2020 (Amendment) which introduced seminal changes to the liquidation regime under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Amendment has been introduced on the back of the discussion paper issued by IBBI on 26 August 2020 on Corporate Liquidation Process (Discussion Paper).
INTRODUCTION
Recently, the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has passed an order reiterating that once a resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC), the successful resolution applicant cannot be permitted to be withdraw its plan.
RELEVANT FACTS
A contentious issue in the interplay between the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and the Limitation Act, 1963 (Limitation Act) has been the applicability of Section 18 of the Limitation Act (Section 18), which stipulates that a fresh period of limitation shall be computed from the time of the acknowledgement of liability in writing before the expiration of the prescribed period of limitation.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (NCLAT) in the case of Sh. Sushil Ansal Vs Ashok Tripathi and Ors, has reiterated that a decree-holder though covered under the definition of creditor under Section 3(10) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) would not fall within the class of financial creditors and therefore, a decree holder cannot initiate a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against a corporate debtor with an object to execute a decree.