Based on a referral by the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) the ECJ held that provisions such as § 64 of the German Limited Liability Companies Act (GmbHG) which regulates the personal liability of German GmbH directors in cases of insolvency, can be regarded as an insolvency law rule by virtue of Art. 4 para. 1 European Insolvency Regulation. The provision can therefore be applicable to a UK limited company (having its centre of main interest in Germany) and its director respectively, in accordance with European law: according to Art. 4 para.

lon_lib1\13867381\1 boothmi Navigating Regulatory Compliance Investment Management Monthly Regulatory Update March 2016 Navigating Regulatory Compliance Monthly Regulatory Update – March 2016 1. Introduction 1.1 It is our pleasure to welcome you to our first Monthly Regulatory Update for investment managers. We understand that compliance and business teams have day jobs and therefore this regulatory update provides commentary on those items which we think are important. 1.2 The Appendix lists each of the relevant announcements by the FCA, ESMA, European Parliament and other bodies.

Daycare company Estro was declared bankrupt in July 2014, but the undertaking was relaunched immediately, as the relaunch was prepared in a ‘pre-pack’ insolvency. All 3600 employees of the bankrupt company were dismissed by the administrator. About 2600 employees were immediately employed again by the relaunched company, which company was a so called ‘connected party’ as the shareholder also held a substantial part of the shares of Estro.

Introduction

A referendum on whether the UK should leave or remain within the EU will take place on 23 June 2016. This briefing considers what the legal consequences of a vote to leave the EU (Brexit) might be for the UK restructuring and insolvency market. Its purpose is not to influence readers towards either the “Leave” or “Remain” camp; rather, it is intended to illustrate the legal changes that Brexit would cause and to consider how the UK might respond to those changes.

Including an unsecured creditor  in an agreed payments waterfall does not by itself confer on that unsecured creditor  the benefit of a mortgagee’s usual duties on enforcement of security, or a direct claim against the sale proceeds.

1. Employment in a Member State of workers resident therein by companies declared insolvent that, notwithstanding formal registration in a third country, have their real seat in said Member State

Introduction:

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that a provision of German law falls within the scope of Article 4 of the EC Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings, thereby paving the way for a German court to require a director of an English incorporated company to make payments under German law where the company has been placed into insolvency proceedings in Germany. 

In the last quarter of 2015, Luxembourg implemented Directive 2014/59/EU of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investments firms (“BRRD”) and Directive 2014/49/EU of 16 April 2014 on deposit guarantee schemes (“DGSD” and together with BRRD, the “Directives”) by way of adopting the law of 18 December 2015 on resolution, recovery and liquidation measures of credit institutions and some investment firms, on deposit guarantee schemes and indemnification of investors (the “

Il Regolamento (UE) n. 2015/848 ha tenuto fermo il principio per cui ciascuna società è soggetta ad unaprocedura nello Stato Membro in cui si trova il proprio COMI, ma ha introdotto forme di cooperazionetra gli amministratori ed i giudici delle singole procedure

Il Regolamento (CE) n. 2000/1346

Legal background

Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 concerns insolvency proceedings with debtors which operate cross-border in the EU.

Broadly, the law applicable to insolvency proceedings is the law of the member state in which the insolvency proceedings are opened. This includes rules relating to the voidness, voidability or unenforceability of legal acts which are detrimental to all creditors; article 4.