Banking & Finance Banking & Finance Dezember / December 2016 4 | Editorial Fokus 6 | Verschärfung der Regulierung auf dem sog. Zweitmarkt – Anlageberatung und -vermittlung von Vermögensanlagen ab 2017 KWG-erlaubnispflichtig 8 | Anforderungen an ein schlüssiges Sanierungskonzept zur Verhinderung einer Insolvenzanfechtung aus Sicht der Gläubiger Aufsichtsrecht 10 | Zusätzliche Anforderungen an die Ausgestaltung einer Limitation Language aufgrund des Asset-Stripping-Verbots gemäß § 292 Kapitalanlagegesetzbuch (KAGB)?
Deutsches Recht: Blick zurück 2016
Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht
Year in Review - German Law in 2016
Corporate and Commercial
Amendment to the Stock Corporation Act: The Amendment to the Stock Corporation Act 2016 (Aktien-rechtsnovelle 2016) introduced, among other things, the option to issue preference shares without subsequent payment, an extended conversion right for convertible bonds, a limitation of the issue of bearer shares for non-listed companies and new provisions on the due dates of dividend payments.
Summary
A recent judgment (German FCJ, 10 September 2015, IX ZR 215/13) deals with the question whether the recipient of a payment may be subject to a clawback claim if he returned the received amount to the debtor before the opening of insolvency proceedings.
Background
German Insolvency Law
an overview.
The insolvency challenge rights give the insolvency administrator, under certain prerequisites, access to assets which the debtor disposed of to the detriment of the creditors prior to the filing for insolvency, thus increasing the insolvency estate.
(German federal high court – decision of September 24th, 2015 – IX ZR 272/13)
Legal background
In accordance with sec. 166 para 1 German Insolvency Code (“InsO”) an insolvency administrator is entitled to utilise tangible assets in his possession, even where the assets are encumbered.
Although the German Insolvency Code regulates the disposal and utilization of tangible assets and claims encumbered in favour of a creditor no regulation exists for rights such as shares, trademarks or intellectual property rights.
On 12 February 2016, the German Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, orBaFin) declared Maple Bank GmbH (“Maple”) as an indemnification case, meaning that the German deposit insurance institutions can compensate the bank’s creditors.
BaFin had previously filed an insolvency petition against Maple, and the insolvency court in Frankfurt am Main opened insolvency proceedings on 11 February 2016. It appointed an insolvency administrator who is now responsible for managing Maple’s affairs.
The German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) recently held that creditors cannot bring claims against the Hellenic Republic before the German courts in the context of Greece's debt restructuring in 2012 , finding that Greece enjoys immunity from jurisdiction before the German courts (decision of 8 March 2016; docket number VI ZR 516/14).
Background and facts
Minor instalment payments alone – also in the event of late payments – may not be sufficient to trigger knowledge of the debtor’s imminent illiquidity within the meaning of section 133 German Insolvency Act
Overview