Una reciente sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (TS) establece que el socio que ejerce el derecho de separación conserva su condición hasta que se reembolse de manera efectiva su participación. La resolución también señala que, en caso de que la separación se produzca antes de la declaración de concurso de acreedores, el crédito del socio será subordinado sin perjuicio de la eventual contingencia derivada de la posible litigiosidad de su cuantía.
Selection of the main judgments on restructuring and insolvency matters.
Silent administrator role allowed in pre-pack sale of business unit
Decision by Barcelona Commercial Court No 7 on October 30, 2020
The decision adopted on October 1, 2020 by commercial judges practicing in Barcelona, Tarragona, Gerona and Lérida states that insolvency receivers, owners or lawyers must report to the Directorate General for Industry of the Catalan Generalitat government regarding any companies with operating business units that have given a pre-insolvency notice, are in insolvency proceedings or other difficult situations
The decision of November 25, 2020, by the Secretary of State for the Economy and Business Support, published the decision by the council of ministers setting out the terms and conditions for the new tranches of the guarantee facilities approved by Royal Decree-Law 25/2020, of July 3, 2020. The new tranches are to be used for funding to businesses under an arrangement and any which, while not under an arrangement, were in the process of reviewing their promissory note program on MARF (Spanish Alternative Bond Market) on April 23, 2020.
2020 ha sido un año atípico. La alerta sanitaria mundial provocada por la expansión del COVID-19 y la consecuente declaración del estado de alarma en España en marzo de 2020 llevaron a una vorágine legislativa sin precedentes. En este contexto, las empresas se encuentran inmersas en un escenario incierto en el que la toma de decisiones juega un papel clave para la viabilidad futura del negocio.
The facts of this case were somewhat unusual although it serves as a reminder of the principles involved in the trading of a business by a trustee in bankruptcy.
Background
JMW Solicitors have recently obtained an Order made pursuant to Section 234 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Act”), which includes a term that allows the office-holder to recover possession of a residential property, without the need for separate possession proceedings being issued pursuant to Part 55 of the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”), which sets out the usual Court procedure for obtaining an order for possession of land.
The background facts to this case are relatively straightforward: a group of companies consisting of the parent (‘AIL’) and three subsidiaries (‘the Subsidiaries’) operated in the energy sector.
A lender (‘Junior Creditor’) advanced approximately £39M to AIL, secured by qualifying floating charges (‘QFC’) over AIL and the Subsidiaries. A second lender (‘Senior Creditor’) subsequently lent £5M to AIL secured by a QFC over AIL but not the Subsidiaries.
Twelve creditors (representing about 16% of company debt, and represented by a firm of licensed insolvency practitioners) have failed in an attempt to compel administrators to move to creditors’ voluntary liquidation, alternatively an order for compulsory liquidation. The Creditors also sought the revocation of a proposal ‘purported to have been deemed approved’.
The Company was involved in construction work, falling victim to the Covid-19 pandemic in that it was forced to cease trading following the announcement of lockdown on 23 March 2020.
The Key Issues and Background
The Court of Appeal was asked to consider two key points (together with matters, including relating to the granting of summary judgment) regarding the procedural aspects of applications in insolvency proceedings. The relevant proceedings were issued by the trustees in bankruptcy of Nicola Ide (the “Trustees”).
First, could the County Court transfer part of insolvency proceedings to the High Court?