У ситуації коли компанія або фізична особа потрапила у скрутне фінансове становище і більше нездатна обслуговувати свої борги або повністю розрахуватися з кредиторами, стосовно такої компанії або фізичної особи може бути відкрита процедура банкрутства. В цій процедурі кредитори та суд мають вирішити подальшу долю боржника та його майна, враховуючи велику кількість факторів і процедурних питань.
The original version of this article was first published in the Trilegal Quarterly Roundup
This article analyses the utility of set-off provisions in commercial contracts, especially in the context of insolvency, in light of a recent Supreme Court decision. It also provides key takeaways for ensuring the feasibility of set-off provisions and making them capable of withstanding judicial scrutiny.
The treatment and position of statutory creditors having a statutory charge in insolvency proceedings gained criticality at the first instance upon passing of the judgment by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of STATE TAX OFFICER (I) VERSUS RAINBOW PAPERS LTD. 2022 SCC ONLINE SC 1162 (Rainbow Papers Case). The issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was whether in terms of Section 48 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, the State Government shall be treated as a “Secured creditor” of the company undergoing insolvency proceedings.
Blog Post:
Press reports are crowded with headlines about the rise in commercial bankruptcy filings, which increased yet again this year.1 High interest rates, inflation, delayed effects of COVID, and huge corporate debt contributed to the jump in corporate insolvency filings. More are anticipated.
The opinion is In re Packet Construction, LLC, Case No. 23-10860 in the Western Texas Bankruptcy Court (issued April 30, 2024, Doc. 103).
Subchapter V Issue & Ruling
Here’s the issue raised by the Subchapter V Trustee’s plan objection and the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling thereon.
–Issue
In a long-running dispute arising out of a failure to supply gas, the English Commercial Court recently ordered that a prime London commercial property be transferred to the award creditor in part-satisfaction of a USD 2.6 billion arbitration award. In this article, we explore the case of Crescent Gas Corporation Ltd v National Iranian Oil Company & Anor [2024] EWHC 835 (Comm) and look at how the Insolvency Act was used to support enforcement of the award.
On April 23, 2024, the American Bankruptcy Institute’s Subchapter V Task Force issued its Final Report.
This article is the fourth in a series summarizing and condensing the Task Force’s Final Report into “a nutshell.” The subject of this article is:
第1 はじめに
本シリーズの最後となる今回は、撤退の場合における 解散・清算・破産について説明したい。前回記載した通 り、買主が見つかれば、持分譲渡手続が最も迅速かつ簡 便であるが、買主が見つからない場合には、解散・清算 か破産を選択することになる。
中国法人の資産が負債よりも多く、すべての債務を支 払うことができる場合には解散・清算手続が可能であ る。他方で債務超過になっている場合には、破産手続に よることになる。バランスシート上の資産が負債より多 い場合であっても、実際には資産価値が毀損している場 合があるため、解散・清算が可能かどうか予めシミュレ ーションしておく必要がある。
第2 解散・清算について
１ 解散・清算の概要