As the name suggests, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency 1997 (Model Law) seeks to address complexities caused where insolvencies cross borders, while leaving substantive insolvency laws of each country largely unaltered. However, as jurisdictions continue to adopt and interpret the Model Law, inconsistencies in its application are coming to light.

Yesterday, Iceland’s Prime Minister announced that the government has decided not to bring suit against the UK authorities for the Freezing Order issued against Landsbanki by the UK authorities on October 8, 2008, on the basis of their Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act.

Recently the German legislature passed a new law, exempting extraordinary profits created by the waiver of claims under restructurings from income tax liability. The amendment was necessary because the German Federal Tax Court had previously held the original administrative decree (which in a conceptually different manner avoided the tax burden on such profits) unlawful. This article gives a brief overview over the legislative history and the practical consequences of the amendment.

1. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has given a preliminary ruling on when a security holder has "possession or…control" of financial collateral for the purposes of Directive 2002/47 on financial collateral arrangements. From an English law perspective, this is particularly relevant for anyone considering whether a floating charge over financial collateral qualifies as a security financial collateral arrangement (or SFCA).

Background – UK implementation and interpretation

The EU Decision

The EU Commission has held on January 26, 2011 that the so called restructuring privilege offered by German corporate tax law, which allows corporations in a distressed financial situation to continue to set off tax loss carry forwards against future profits even if their shareholder structure has substantially changed, is incompatible with EU State Aid provisions.

The recipients, which have applied the restructuring privilege, are now threatened with the reclaim of the tax benefits.

The Court of Appeal has ordered a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) in Grenville Holden Hampshire v the Board of the Pension Protection Fund which involves a pension scheme member, whose early retirement pension was reduced by two-thirds on the scheme's entry to the PPF, arguing that the statutory cap on compensation payable by the PPF does not give full effect to Article 8 of the EU Insolvency Directive.

INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE DISPUTES

2020 REVIEW

The contents of this publication are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action based on this publication.

INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE DISPUTES 2020 REVIEW

Contents

Preface

The High Court has held that s.236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“IA 1986”) does not have extra-territorial effect, so that the court is not generally permitted to make an order requiring a person outside the UK to produce books and papers and give an account of their dealings with an insolvent company: Re Akkurate Ltd (in Liquidation) [2020] EWHC 1433 (Ch).

We summarise the background and outcomes of Case C-73/20 – Oeltrans, an important ruling for liquidators faced with the avoidance of a third party payment and a conflict of laws.

The facts

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