Zoals reeds vermeld in ons vorig artikel in deze materie, is het concept van de overdracht van een onderneming één van de pijlers van de hervorming van het insolventierecht in België.

U maakte reeds kennis met het concept van de overdracht van ondernemingen onder gerechtelijk gezag, dat herzien is sinds de hervorming van 1 september 2023.

Deze bijdrage vormt het tweede deel van dit onderwerp, ditmaal over de overdracht van een onderneming in het kader van een "besloten voorbereiding van een faillissement".

As already mentioned in our previous article on this subject, the concept of the transfer of a business is one of the pillars of the reform of insolvency law in Belgium.

In our previous article regarding this subject, we introduced the concept of the transfer of a business under judicial authority, reviewed since the reform as of 1 September 2023.

This contribution constitutes the second part of the subject, and deals with the transfer of a business in the context of a private (confidential) preparation prior to bankruptcy.

Notre contribution précédente comprenait les propos introductifs portant sur la réforme du droit de l’insolvabilité, entrée en vigueur ce 1er septembre 2023. Comme indiqué, la présente contribution porte sur un élément clé de cette réforme.

La révision du paysage de l’insolvabilité n’a pas épargné le concept du transfert d’entreprise, qui en constitue l’un des piliers.

Le transfert de l'entreprise peut intervenir à deux stades : dans le cadre d’une procédure de réorganisation judiciaire publique, mais également dans le cadre d’une préparation silencieuse à la faillite.

The continuing effort in Congress to extend Subchapter V’s $7.5 million debt limit recently hit a snag. The result: the $7.5 million debt limit for Subchapter V eligibility expired on June 21, 2024, and the Subchapter V debt limit is now reduced to an inflation-adjusted $3,024,725.[i]

You've been appointed as chapter 7 trustee in a case involving a well-known, high-flying debtor whose schedules reflect substantial unsecured liabilities, nominal non-exempt assets, and potential avoidance claims.

They say every man needs protection, they say that every man must fall.¹

Hellard & others -v- OJSC Rossiysky Kredit Bank (in liquidation) & others [202] EWHC 1783 (Ch)

In dealing with whether trustees in bankruptcy might potentially be breaching UK sanctions legislation by allowing Russian creditors to participate in UK liquidation proceedings, the Court has considered recent authorities on whether a designated person can be said to directly or indirectly own or control an entity and has offered its own perspective on how the relevant wording in the legislation should be construed.

The background facts

Can non-compete and confidentiality protections in a rejected franchise agreement be discharged in bankruptcy?

The answer is, “No,” according to In re Empower Central Michigan, Inc.[Fn. 1]

Facts

Debtor is an automotive repair shop.

Debtor operates under a Franchise Agreement with Autolab Franchising, LLC. The Franchise Agreement has a non-compete provision, and there is a separate-but-related confidentiality agreement.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently upheld a trial court’s rejection of a borrower’s allegations that a mortgagee and its servicer violated the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by allegedly inaccurately reporting her loan as delinquent following the borrower’s successful completion of her bankruptcy plan, allegedly rejecting her subsequent monthly payments, and filing a foreclosure action based on the supposed post-bankruptcy defaults.

A “silent” creditor in Subchapter V is one who does not vote on the debtor’s plan and does not object to that plan. The “silent” creditor is a problem for Subchapter V cases.

The Problem

Here’s the problem: