The Swiss Insurance Oversight Act has been subject to a partial revision in order to bring the protection of insurance customers in line with international developments and to improve the competitiveness of the Swiss insurance sector. The new provisions include a new insolvency restructuring regime, a customer categorisation making supervisory requirements proportional to the protection required by customers as well as new rules of conduct applicable to insurance undertakings and intermediaries.

WHOA Dutch scheme of arrangement LAW & TAX I Introduction 1. This memorandum describes the bill on court sanctioning private composition to avoid bankruptcy (de Wet homologatie onderhands akkoord ter voorkoming van faillissement, the WHOA or the Dutch Scheme). The WHOA introduces the possibility in the Netherlands for companies to offer a composition to its creditors outside an insolvency proceeding.1 The WHOA will enter into force on 1 January 2021. II The WHOA II.1 Offering a composition: by whom? 2.

Op 26 mei 2020 heeft de Tweede Kamer het wetsvoorstel Wet Homologatie Onderhands Akkoord (WHOA) aangenomen. Als de Eerste Kamer dit voorstel eveneens goedkeurt, is de WHOA een feit en kunnen huurder-schuldenaars die in financiële nood verkeren onder voorwaarden wijzigingen laten aanbrengen in lopende huurovereenkomsten, of deze zelfs geheel doen eindigen. De verwachting is dat de WHOA op 1 januari 2021 in werking zal treden.

LAW & TAX Swiss Restructuring & Insolvency in a nutshell loyensloeff.com LAW & TAX Introduction Ever-changing market conditions require businesses to continuously monitor their earnings and liquidity situation as well as their debt structure. In addition, the overall economic situation remains uncertain and asks for continued operational flexibility and resilience. Thus, it is not surprising that companies need to rethink their organisational obligations in restructuring and insolvency situations.

The Judge in the Sunbird scheme of arrangement sanction hearing has declined to sanction the scheme due to the “paucity of information” provided by the company to the creditors ahead of the creditor vote.

The Judge criticised the company’s general approach to the way in which it engaged with creditors, particularly those whom the directors felt would be obstructive to the scheme’s progress. In general terms, the Judge commented on the practice of lock-up agreements and highlighted concerns with the payment of lock-up fees.

Jonathon Crook of Shoosmiths discusses the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Industrial Strategy v PAG Asset Preservation Limited in which the Court of Appeal dismissed a public interest challenge to a scheme for the mitigation of business rates on empty property and where he acted for the successful companies.

A new Act, the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, restricts many suppliers’ rights to exit commercial agreements due to restructuring or insolvency-related causes, even where those rights are expressly set out in the contract.

Since the release of the film Titanic in 1997, debate has persisted whether Rose could have shifted over slightly to let Jack onto the driftwood after they found themselves thrown from the sinking ship into the North Atlantic. Was there space? Would they both have frozen? Who knows.

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 received Royal Assent on 26 June 2020. Regulations have been introduced which give the Pension Protection Fund (the PPF) certain rights.

Recent werden twee koninklijke besluiten (KB nr. 45 en nr. 46) gepubliceerd waarin enkele bijkomende steunmaatregelen voorzien worden in het kader van de COVID-19-uitbraak. Deze voorzien enerzijds de mogelijkheid voor de opname van voltijds corona-ouderschapsverlof en anderzijds enkele nuttige maatregelen tot herverdelen van de arbeid, waaronder het corona-tijdskrediet, voor ondernemingen in herstructurering of moeilijkheden.

Uitbreiding corona-ouderschapsverlof

On 17 April 2020 the Supreme Court handed down an important interim judgment concerning the pre-pack bankruptcy of Heiploeg. In this judgment, the Supreme Court holds that the rules on the Transfer of Undertakings (as explained further below) do not apply to a restart following bankruptcy. In addition, the Supreme Court holds that the rules on the Transfer of Undertakings do not always apply in the case of a restart that has been prepared by means of a pre-pack. The Supreme Court takes the view that in the pre-pack bankruptcy of Heiploeg these rules do not apply.