Standard Profil’s scheme of arrangement was sanctioned by the English High Court on 9 September 2025, notwithstanding a recent Frankfurt court decision casting doubt on whether English restructuring plans and schemes of arrangement proposed by German companies would be capable of sanction by the English courts going forward as a result of recognition issues (see ‘More on this topic’).

When a company is in financial distress, directors face difficult choices. Should they trade on to try to “trade out” of the company’s financial difficulties or should they file for insolvency? If they act too soon, will creditors complain that they should have done more to save the business? A recent English High Court case raises the prospect of directors potentially being held to account for decisions that “merely postpone the inevitable.”

When a company is in financial distress, its directors will face difficult choices. Should they trade on to trade out of the company's financial difficulties or should they file for insolvency? If they delay filing and the company goes into administration or liquidation, will the directors be at risk from a wrongful trading claim by the subsequently appointed liquidator? Once in liquidation, will they be held to have separately breached their duties as directors and face a misfeasance claim? If they file precipitously, will creditors complain they did not do enough to save the business?

El Tribunal Supremo, en su sentencia número 513/2024, de 17 de abril (Rec. 2443/2020) ("la Sentencia"), confirma la válida legitimación del recurrente declarado en concurso de acreedores con suspensión de facultades, en tanto la administración concursal omitió el deber de sustituirlo en el procedimiento en trámite.

On June 27, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma LP, addressing the question of whether a company can use bankruptcy to resolve the liability of non-debtor third parties. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that the bankruptcy code does not authorize a release and an injunction that, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11, effectively seek to discharge the claims against a nondebtor without the consent of the affected claimants.

On June 27, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., 603 U.S. ____ (2024) holding that the Bankruptcy Code does not allow for the inclusion of non-consensual third-party releases in chapter 11 plans. This decision settles a long-standing circuit split on the propriety of such releases and clarifies that a plan may not provide for the release of claims against non-debtors without the consent of the claimants.

En los últimos años, sociedades y fondos han sido capaces de aumentar la rentabilidad de sus inversiones al implantar políticas ESG. Esta herramienta les ha permitido, no sólo una correcta mitigación de los riesgos, sino también aprovechar nuevas oportunidades, generar valor y mejorar la reputación corporativa, al mismo tiempo que contribuían al desarrollo sostenible y con impacto en la sociedad.

La Dirección General de Seguridad Jurídica y Fe Pública ha resuelto, en Resolución de 19 de febrero de 2024, que una sociedad concursada, en fase de liquidación, no puede nombrar un administrador único. La DGSJyFP excluye, implícitamente, que subsista cualquier rango de funciones representativas que no se vea afectada por el concurso, a pesar de lo generalmente defendido por la doctrina.

Referencias Jurídicas CMS

Abril 2024

Posts Jurídicos

Corporate / M&A

Avoidance action is an umbrella term for adversary proceedings that seek to unwind or avoid transactions that occurred before an insolvency filing. These actions are also referred to as “claw-back claims” because, by undoing a transaction, an asset or value is being clawed back into the insolvency estate.

In its recent German Pellets decision, the Fifth Circuit held that a creditor could not assert its indemnification defenses in a suit brought by the trustee of a liquidation trust because the Chapter 11 plan’s express language permanently enjoined the defenses and the creditor chose not to participate in the debtor’s bankruptcy despite having actual knowledge of it.