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 National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (NCLAT) in the case of Sh. Sushil Ansal Vs Ashok Tripathi and Ors, has reiterated that a decree-holder though covered under the definition of creditor under Section 3(10) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) would not fall within the class of financial creditors and therefore, a decree holder cannot initiate a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against a corporate debtor with an object to execute a decree.
In continuation of Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) efforts to ease financial stress caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the RBI issued the circular on the Resolution Framework for Covid-19 Related Stress dated 6 August 2020 (August 6 Circular). The August 6 Circular creates a limited time window for certain categories of borrowers affected by Covid-19 pandemic related business disruption to be allowed resolution plans in the nature of restructuring while permitting the borrower accounts to retain their status as ‘standard’.
Background:
On 24 July 2020, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), in its decision in GRIDCO Limited v Surya Kanta Sathapathy and Others [C.A. (AT) (Insolvency) 1271 of 2019] (GRIDCO judgement), held that the termination of a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) during the subsistence of a moratorium would be in violation of Section 14(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC). FACTUAL BACKGROUND |
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.
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;
In a significant judgment dated 9 June 2020 titled ‘Indus Biotech Private Limited v.