In a recent judgment on directors’ liability (Bundesgerichtshof, 18 November 2020, IV ZR 217/19), the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) has clarified the scope of D&O insurance coverage, holding that company directors are entitled to its protection.
Background
Das BAG begehrt in seiner Vorlage an den EuGH vom 16.10.2018 (Az.: 3 AZR 139/17) die Klärung der Frage, in welchem Rahmen der Erwerber eines Betriebs aus der Insolvenz des Veräußerers für Betriebsrenten gemäß § 613a BGB übergegangener Arbeitnehmer haften muss und ob seine bislang praktizierte erwerberfreundliche teleologische Reduktion des § 613a Abs. 1 BGB in diesem Zusammenhang unionsrechtskonform ist.
I. Einleitung
The UK government has lifted the current restrictions on statutory demands but imposed new temporary requirements for winding-up petitions presented from 1 October 2021 until 31 March 2022. The measures aim to protect companies from aggressive creditor enforcement as the economy opens up and other protections are lifted.
New requirements
The UK government has published new draft regulations to require mandatory scrutiny of administration sales to connected parties (such as the insolvent company’s existing directors or shareholders).
In the UK, a "pre-pack" is an arrangement under which the sale of all or part of a company’s business or assets is agreed with a purchaser prior to the appointment of administrators. The sale is carried out by the administrators immediately on, or shortly after, their appointment. Administrators must be licensed insolvency practitioners.
The German Federal Court of Justice has tightened its grip on company directors again. In a recent judgment on directors’ liability in insolvency situations, the Court clarified the scope of sections 60- 61 of the German Insolvency Act.
The German Act on the Stabilisation and Restructuring Framework for Business (StaRUG) came into force on 1 January 2021, incorporating the EU Restructuring Directive into German law. It provides the first pre-insolvency restructuring framework for the reorganisation of companies facing "imminent illiquidity" and the possibility of involving dissenting creditors. The restructuring plan – which is very similar to the English Scheme of Arrangement and the German insolvency plan – is the central instrument.
Section 1 StaRUG
Alongside the permanent reforms to English insolvency law introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, the government introduced a temporary suspension of certain provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the IA) to address the economic turbulence caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The UK’s corporate governance regime has been stress-tested in the past decade and in many respects it has done well. However, in response to certain high profile corporate collapses which have caused heavy losses for creditors, in particular individuals and suppliers with little opportunity to protect themselves against losses, and in the spirit of continual improvement, the government has recently launched its “Insolvency and Corporate Governance Consultation”.
The consultation indicates that the government is considering changes in the law to address:
In a recent ruling, the Austrian Supreme Court has defined de facto managing directors and their obligations and liabilities in connection to wrongful trading.
The decision
The key takeaways from the ruling are:
Under section 64 of the German Companies Act (GmbHG), the managing director of a company is obliged to reimburse payments which have been made after the company becomes illiquid or over-indebted but not when the payments are made with the diligence of a prudent businessman. Such permitted payments include those that are necessary for production, internal operation, and the maintenance of the business concern.