In a recent case, the National Company Law Tribunal ("NCLT"), New Delhi in M/s Brand Reality Services Ltd. v. M/s Sir John Bakeries India Pvt.
NCLAT: Decree holder cannot be classified as a financial creditor for the purpose of initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 II. Supreme Court: Limitation period for an application under Section 7 of the IBC for initiation of CIRP is three years from the date of default III. NCLAT: IBC has no bar for the 'Promoter' to file 'resolution application', even if otherwise not eligible in terms of Section 29A IV. Consumer Protection Act, 2019: An analysis
In a recent order issued by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT“) in the case of Sushil Ansal Vs. Ashok Tripathi1, the NCLAT has held that a decree-holder cannot be treated as a financial creditor for the purpose of triggering insolvency proceedings against a company.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (NCLAT) in the case of Sh. Sushil Ansal Vs Ashok Tripathi and Ors, has reiterated that a decree-holder though covered under the definition of creditor under Section 3(10) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) would not fall within the class of financial creditors and therefore, a decree holder cannot initiate a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against a corporate debtor with an object to execute a decree.
Our tracker contains an overview of changes made in light of the Covid-19 outbreak which impose restrictions on creditor rights, relax debtor obligations to file for insolvency or concern other insolvency-related issues. As you will appreciate, this is a dynamic situation, and both the measures announced and applicable legal framework will continue to evolve in the coming days, weeks and months
The past couple of years have seen a number of major airlines collapse, including Monarch and Air Berlin. Unfortunately, this year has already seen the number of casualties pile up with the likes of WOW Air, FlyBMI, Primera Air and Jet Airways all ceasing operations. With Thomas Cook – the UK’s oldest travel operator – the latest in jeopardy, we look at Lexology’s recent articles in an attempt to analyse this trend and explore the legislation being introduced to support the aviation industry.
Need some AIR – can airlines operate when insolvent?
ENEFI Energiahatékonysági Nyrt v Directia Generala Regionala a Finantelor Publice Brasov (DGRFP) [2016] All ER (D) 110 (Nov)
The Court of Justice of the European Union ("ECJ") has handed down a notable judgment in the case of ENEFI Energiahatékonysági Nyrt v Directia Generala Regionala a Finantelor Publice Brasov (DGRFP) [2016] All ER (D) 110 (Nov), ruling that domestic laws governing forfeiture of a claim in insolvency proceedings apply to foreign creditors too.
PRA consults on capital adequacy. The UK Prudential Regulation Authority proposed changes to the PRA’s Pillar 2 framework for the banking sector, including changes to rules and supervisory statements. The proposed policy is intended to ensure that firms have adequate capital to support the relevant risks in their business and that they have appropriate processes to ensure compliance with the Capital Requirements Regulation and Capital Requirements Directive.
The giants of Asia – Indonesia, China, and India – raise many opportunities and challenges for insolvency practitioners. Baker McKenzie’s own Andi Kadir spoke this morning about some of the solutions to those problems, showcasing his significant experience with insolvency reforms and opportunities in Indonesia.
Andi highlighted the benefits of the Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang regime as a restructuring tool in Indonesia. A PKPU is a debtor in possession mechanism, somewhat like a blend of a US Chapter 11 administration with aspects of the insolvency laws of the Netherlands.
Short stories
Amendments to the Czech Insolvency Act 2016