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.

The restructuring & insolvency Q&A series provides a comprehensive overview of some of the key points of law and practice of the regulatory environment in Luxembourg. Today's chapter focuses on tips and traps.

What are your top tips for a smooth restructuring and what potential sticking points would you highlight?

Where Luxembourg holding or bond issuing companies are key to a distressed group, the following points are often misunderstood or considered too late, thus jeopardising a smooth restructuring;

On 19 June 2020, following the consultation, the Federal Council adopted the dispatch on the partial revision of the Swiss Federal Banking Act (Bundesgesetz über die Banken und Sparkassen, Bankengesetz). The legislative amendment intends to strengthen customer and depositor protection and promote system stability.

The partial revision focuses on three main areas: (i) the restructuring proceedings for banks, (ii) deposit insurances and (iii) intermediated securities.

Foreign bankruptcy and insolvency decrees generally remain without legal effect in Switzerland. A foreign bankruptcy or insolvency decree must first be recognized by the competent Swiss court. In a newly published decision, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court further clarified the recently revised provisions governing the recognition and the following procedure.

Introduction and background

Clearly there are some major economic challenges ahead. Many businesses may be able to withstand the challenges ahead but it may very well be that their trading counterparties (whether suppliers, customers or other stakeholders) will not. Whilst these times can represent an opportunity for some, such as potential acquirers (whether of businesses, assets or distressed debt), in most cases, the climate represents a threat to businesses.

The restructuring & insolvency Q&A series provides a comprehensive overview of some of the key points of law and practice of the regulatory environment in Luxembourg. Today's chapter focuses on trends and predictions.

How would you describe the current restructuring and insolvency landscape and prevailing trends in your jurisdiction? Are any new developments anticipated in the next 12 months, including any proposed legislative reforms?

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill (the "Bill") was published on 20 May 2020. The Bill introduces a new type of ‘moratorium’ whereby eligible companies can take 40 days to restructure without the threat of enforcement action from creditors.

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill 2019-21 (the “Bill”) published on 20 May 2020, had its third reading on 3 June 2020. This briefing focuses on the proposed changes to shareholder meetings and Companies House filing deadlines. For the purposes of this briefing, the “Relevant Period” began on 26 March 2020 and ends on 30 September 2020.

1. Flexibility for holding shareholder’s meetings.

Market conditions and Covid-19

The Covid-19 pandemic and the response to it, including global lockdowns, has caused substantial disruption to business operations and trade which has resulted in significant cash flow and financial challenges for many businesses. As a result, in a number of cases, financing covenants have been breached which have triggered defaults under financing arrangements.

Shenzhen Everich Supply Chain Co, Ltd (in Liquidation in the Mainland of the People's Republic of China) [2020] HKCFI 965 (date of judgment: 4 June 2020)

For the second time the Hong Kong Court has recognised a PRC winding-up proceeding and granted assistance to the administrator of a PRC company appointed by a PRC Court. The Hong Kong Court also granted the administrator an express right to take control of the company's subsidiaries in Hong Kong.

Background