En una reciente resolución, la DGRN trata de equilibrar el necesario rigor que debe presidir nuestro sistema registral con la adecuada agilidad y seguridad jurídica que requieren los adquirentes de bienes cuando se ha declarado la insolvencia.

La Dirección General de los Registros y del Notariado (DGRN) ha relajado los requisitos de inscripción de los bienes adquiridos durante el procedimiento concursal y, señaladamente, durante la fase de liquidación. Así lo señala en una resolución de 24 de octubre de 2018.

The DGRN is seeking to strike a balance between the necessary rigor that must prevail in the Spanish registration system and the legal certainty needed for the recipients of assets during insolvency proceedings. 

In a decision rendered on October 24, 2018, the Directorate-General for Registers and the Notarial Profession (DGRN) relaxed the requirements for registration of assets acquired during insolvency proceedings, and specifically, during the liquidation phase.

The latest decision in the external administration ofMirabela is a reminder of the utility of the section 424 directions process for receivers, and an example of the steps to be taken in the face of competing asset claims.

The Court directed that the receivers of Mirabela were justified in distributing sale proceeds of approximately US$59.5 million in the face of a third party claim to the proceeds, provided the receivers first gave 21 days’ notice of intent to do so.

The case is a timely reminder that:

The Federal Court has confirmed that there is no difference between liquidation and deed administration of a corporate trustee in relation to dealings with trust assets and the distribution of proceeds of those assets for the benefit of creditors.

Background

Manpak operated as the trustee for the MP Unit Trust, which carried on the business of a product wholesaler. Under the Trust Deed, Manpak would be disqualified from holding office if it suffered an Event of Default, which included the appointment of an administrator.

The Court of Appeal - Supreme Court of Western Australian has delivered a decision confirming that a statutory set-off under s 553C of the Corporations Act can still be available to a creditor where a general security interest has attached to the amounts it is seeking to set-off (provided those amounts are circulating assets of the insolvent company), whilst leaving the door open for creditors to rely upon set-off rights at general law in those instances where set-off under s 553C is unavailable.

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 High Court recently handed down its much anticipated judgment in Mighty River International Limited v Hughes, confirming that deeds of company arrangement which have the effect of extending the administration period can be valid under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act).

Key takeaways

The High Court has refused to grant the Queensland State Government (Qld Government) special leave to appeal the Queensland Court of Appeal’s March 2018 decision in favour of the liquidators of Linc Energy, concerning the liquidators’ obligations to cause Linc Energy to comply with an Environmental Protection Order (EPO).

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