Pour rappel, en cas d’approbation d’un plan de réorganisation judiciaire par la majorité des créanciers, il appartient au Tribunal de commerce d’homologuer le plan approuvé pour autant qu’il ne soit pas contraire à l’ordre public. 

Selon l’article 49, § 1 de la loi du 31 janvier 2009 relative à la continuité des entreprises, le plan de réorganisation peut prévoir le règlement différencié de certaines catégories de créances, notamment en fonction de leur ampleur ou de leur nature.

La Cour d’appel de Mons a encore récemment rappelé la responsabilité attachée à la fonction de liquidateur d’une société commerciale.

La principale innovation de la loi du 27 mai 2013 modifiant la loi du 31 janvier 2009 sur la continuité des entreprises (« LCE ») réside dans le renforcement considérable des missions dévolues aux professionnels du chiffre.

Dès lors que la pratique révèle que le recours à la réorganisation judiciaire est souvent trop tardif, le législateur a été soucieux que les dirigeants soient informés suffisamment tôt des menaces qui pèsent sur la continuité de leur entreprise.

Until now legal entities serving as board members, directors, or liquidators of companies could choose whether to subject themselves to VAT for the services they rendered. But according to the Belgian VAT administration’s published decision ET.125.180 on 20 November 2014, this optional regime will be abolished from 1 January 2015, making these entities liable for VAT mandatorily.

Since the entry into force of the Financial Collateral Act of 15 December 2004 (the "Collateral Act") implementing Directive 2002/47/EC on financial collateral arrangements as regards linked systems and credit claims (the "Collateral Directive"), financial collateral arrangements have benefitted from increased flexibility and legal certainty in Belgium.

The Belgian Constitutional Court declared netting arrangements in insolvency proceedings, which are explicitly allowed under the Belgian Financial Collateral Law of 15 December 2004, unconstitutional where such netting arrangements apply to non-merchants. Despite the numerous criticisms on this decision, a legislative proposal was drafted on 13 September 2011 in order to explicitly exclude non-merchants from the application of the Belgian Financial Collateral Law.

Petroplus, the largest independent refiner and wholesaler of petroleum products in Europe entered into various insolvency proceedings in Switzerland, England and Wales, France, Germany and Belgium on 24-27 January 2012 after the group failed to reach agreement with its creditors to extend the deadline of its loan repayments.

Through its decision of 27 November 2008, the Belgian Constitutional Court declared netting arrangements in insolvency proceedings, which are explicitly allowed under the Belgian Financial Collateral Law of 15 December 2004, unconstitutional where such netting arrangements apply to non-merchants. Despite the numerous criticisms about this decision, the amended Belgian Financial Collateral Law, entered into force on 10 November 2011, now explicitly excludes non-merchants from its scope.

Under European law, there are no general rules whit respect to the liability of a holding company for the debts of its insolvent subsidiary.

The Council Regulation (EC) N° 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings only provides for a common framework for insolvency proceedings in the European Union (EU). The harmonised rules on insolvency proceedings intend to prevent assets or judicial proceedings being transferred from one EU country to another for the purposes of obtaining a more favourable legal position to the detriment of creditors (“forum shopping”).

Recent Developments