Insolvency creditors in Germany do not have much to fear from a harmonisation of avoidance actions in the EU. They are used to rigid statutory provisions.

This article continues our Law-Now series "Harmonisation of Insolvency Laws in the EU" in which we provide an overview of the articles addressing insolvency avoidance actions of the draft EU directive.

As explained in the first part of the series, the differing national insolvency regulations of the 27 EU member states creates risks for investors, who will have to consider their investments in light of possible business failures and the resulting exposure to monetary losses.

Muss die Geschäftsführung in der Krise die Belange der Gläubiger stets vorrangig vor den Gesellschafterinteressen („shift of fiduciary duties“) behandeln?

There have been many reported cases in the bankruptcies of Mr and Mrs Brake (the “Brakes”) including the recent case of Patley Wood Farm LLP v Kicks [2023] EWCA Civ 901 where the Court of Appeal considered an application under s303 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “IA 1986”) against a decision of the trustees in bankruptcy of the Brakes (the “Trustees”).

The Supreme Court’s judgment in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and ors^[1] (“Sequana”) is a key decision on the law surrounding directors’ duties.

The High Court was required to consider the Supreme Court’s Sequana judgment in Hunt v Singh (below).

What did we learn from Sequana?

Der Aufsichtsrat ist ein Kontrollorgan. Er überwacht die Geschäftsführung. Unterlaufen ihm Fehler, haften die Mitglieder des Aufsichtsrats persönlich.

Aufsichtsräte gibt es in deutschen Unternehmen seit über 150 Jahren. Das Gesetz, betreffend die Kommanditgesellschaften auf Aktien und die Aktiengesellschaften vom 11. Juni 1870 bestimmte:

Why calculating potential claims under s214 Insolvency Act 1986 can be far from simple

Introduction

Overview

Die Implementierung von ESG-Vorgaben im Krisenfrüherkennungssystem und deren Einhaltung ist ein (gewichtiger) Bestandteil zum krisenresilienten Unternehmen.

In the recent case of Brake & Anor v Chedington Court Estate Limited [2023] UKSC 29, the Supreme Court has clarified the categories of persons who have standing to make a challenge to the conduct of a trustee in bankruptcy under s303 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Act”). The Supreme Court confirmed that its decision will also apply to creditors and others seeking to challenge the actions of a liquidator under s168(5) of the Act. The decision will be welcomed by practitioners.