Aktuelle Rspr. des BGH zur Hinweis- und Warnpflicht eines Rechtsberaters bei möglichem Insolvenzgrund.
Eine Herausforderung für Gläubiger im Insolvenzverfahren: Die Informationsbeschaffung zur Steuerung der Geschäftsbeziehung und Geltendmachung von Rechten.
Der Insolvenzverwalter oder in der Eigenverwaltung der eigenverwaltende Schuldner (in der Regel der Geschäftsführer) wird dem ihm bekannten Gläubiger nach Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens schriftlich die Gelegenheit geben, Forderungen zur Insolvenztabelle anzumelden. Damit ist der Gläubiger zumindest über die Eröffnung informiert.
Der BGH festigt und erweitert seine Rechtsprechung zum Kleinbeteiligtenprivileg im Kontext der insolvenzrechtlichen Anfechtung nach § 135 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 InsO.
This article was first published on India Business Law Journal on 22 June 2023.
In M Suresh Kumar Reddy v Canara Bank and Ors, the Supreme Court clarified that its observations inVidarbha Industries Power Limited v Axis Bank Limited were restricted to the particular facts of that case. Therefore, except in exceptional circumstances, National Company Law Tribunals (NCLT) must admit applications under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), once the existence of a debt and default is established.
The EU Commission has presented a draft directive on the mandatory inclusion of a "pre-pack proceeding" in national insolvency laws.
On 7 December 2022, the European Commission published a draft directive harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law with the aim of facilitating distressed M&A by reducing legal uncertainties in cross-border transactions.
The lack of harmonised insolvency laws has long been regarded as one of the greatest obstacles to the free movement of capital in the EU in general and to cross-border investments, insolvency proceedings and restructuring in particular.
Die EU-Kommission hat einen Richtlinienentwurf u.a. zur verpflichtenden Aufnahme eines „Pre-pack-Verfahrens“ in die nationalen Insolvenzgesetze vorgelegt.
Die Entscheidung des BGH zur Wirksamkeit insolvenzabhängiger Lösungsklauseln könnte der Grundstein einer neuen Linie in der Rechtsprechung werden.
The Department of Telecommunications is seeking to overhaul the law governing the provision of telecommunication services through the Draft Telecommunication Bill, 2022. The Bill also seeks to govern the provision of telecom services and, or, availability of network during insolvency proceedings in respect of a telecom licensee or assignee. While the DoT’s rationale for this is understandable, the proposed provisions may conflict with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
This article examines the NCLT and NCLAT’s power to exercise contempt jurisdiction under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the inconsistent approach taken by different benches.
Although the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) was initially hailed as a welcome reform that would enable timebound and effective insolvency resolution, its tenure has been fraught with issues and uncertainty. One of the issues that remains open is the power to punish for contempt under the Code.