Le créancier d’une société déclarée en faillite doit effectuer une déclaration de créances auprès du greffe du tribunal de commerce qui a déclaré la faillite en mentionnant le montant de sa créance et le privilège éventuel dont il peut se prévaloir. Dans l’hypothèse où le produit de la réalisation des actifs de la société faillie/en liquidation est suffisant, ce privilège permettra de récupérer à l’issue de la procédure de faillite un éventuel dividende.
Het Hof van Justitie heeft geoordeeld dat onder de werkingssfeer van de Insolventieverordening niet alleen situaties vallen die verband houden met twee of meer lidstaten; een dergelijke algemene en absolute voorwaarde voor de toepassing van de Insolventieverordening zou de doelstelling hiervan immers voorbij schieten en een efficiënte en doeltreffende afwikkeling van insolventieprocedures in het gedrang brengen.
After five years of litigation, on 3 April 2014, the US Department of Justice entered into a settlement agreement with Kerr-McGee Corporation and its parent company, Anadarko Petroleum (“Kerr-McGee”). This agreement requires Kerr-McGee to pay $5.15 billion in order to compensate for its environmental and tort liabilities of the past 85 years.
This agreement came after the 12 December 2013 judgment of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in Tronox Inc., et al., v. Kerr-McGee Corp., et al. (In re Tronox Inc.), 503 B.R. 239 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2013).
Historically, HMRC has allowed insolvency practitioners to, at an early stage following their
appointment, cancel the VAT registration of the insolvent business. Practitioners have then been
entitled to account for VAT on any subsequent supplies using HMRC’s form VAT 833 (Statement of
Value Added Tax on goods sold in satisfaction of a debt).
In Bailey & Others (Joint Liquidators of D&D Wines International Limited) v Angove’s Pty Limited1, the Court of Appeal overturned a decision of the High Court, and so permitted the liquidator of an insolvent agent to recover funds due to it from end-customers despite the agency having been terminated.
Background
The High Court (David Donaldson QC) has held in Enta Technologies Limited v HMRC [2014] EWHC 548 (Ch), that where a winding-up petition was brought by HMRC based on the non-payment of tax raised in assessments and the taxpayer's appeal against those assessments was pending, the winding-up court should refuse to adjudicate on the merits of the appeal and should leave that question to be dealt with by the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) ('FTT').
Background
Suite aux faillites d’une quinzaine de boutiques au mois de septembre dernier au centre-ville de Luxembourg et partant du constat de la disparition progressive des commerces en centre-ville ainsi que d’une baisse de la création d’entreprises dans le secteur du commerce de détail, l’ancien gouvernement a émis un avant-projet de loi sur le bail commercial le 4 octobre 2013 (ci-après « l’avant-projet » ou le « projet »).
The recent Court of Appeal decision in Rawlinson and Hunter Trustees SA & others v Akers & another [2014] serves to emphasise that third party reports commissioned by liquidators to enable them to consider whether litigation should be commenced in order to make recoveries for the benefit of creditors will not always attract litigation privilege.
In its decision on the Game Station1 appeal, the Court of Appeal has overturned the cases of Goldacre2 and Luminar3 holding that office holders of insolvent companies must pay rent of property occupied for the benefit of creditors on a “pay as you go” basis irrespective of when rent falls due under the lease.
The facts