Law 1676 of 2013 (Secured Interest Law), which came into effect in 2014, has substantially affected the legal scope of creditors’ rights in the context of insolvency proceedings (reorganization and liquidation). In particular, the law has potentially created a new type of creditor; the secured creditor, which has rights that differ from those creditors included in the creditor hierarchy in the Civil Code and the Corporate Insolvency Law.
Immediately following the results of the UK referendum on exiting the EU in June 2016, we wrote about the potential impact of Brexit on cross-border restructuring and insolvency work. As we identified then, the key issue in this area is the potentially significant implications of losing the reciprocal effect of the EU Regulation on insolvency proceedings and the Brussels Regulation (recast). In this article we focus on the impact of the loss of recognition under the Insolvency Regulation.
A Csődtörvényt módosító új javaslattal kapcsolatban az elmúlt napokban egy népszerű hírportálon jelent meg nagyobb terjedelmű írás „Lex reptér: törvény, ami az egész magyar gazdaságot veszélyezteti” címmel. Blogbejegyzésemben amellett érvelek, hogy amennyiben a követelésbehajtási célú felszámolási eljárásokat jogi realitásként elfogadjuk, úgy a módosítás alapvetően jó irányba mutat.
Following a suite of recent reforms to Australian insolvency laws, liquidators are now able to assign rights to sue, conferred on them personally by the Corporations Act. The new power to assign is broad. It appears that the implications of the power will need to be clarified by the judiciary before they are fully understood.
In this article, we look at the issues that arise from these legislative amendments along with the opportunities created.
After a lengthy consultation period, the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PAPDC) has now been finalised and will come into force on 1 October 2017. This protocol will apply to lenders who are seeking payment of a debt from an individual/ sole trader, as a debtor or guarantor. Now is the time to update your systems and procedures to accommodate the new protocol requirements.
What is required?
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware recently issued an opinion that could mean that directors and officers of insolvent entities face liability for damages caused by the failure to timely file for bankruptcy protection.
In Berryman v Zurich Australia Ltd [2016] WASC 196, the Supreme Court of Western Australia held a bankrupt, Berryman, was able to maintain legal action in his own name, claiming TPD insurance benefits from Zurich.
The Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) relevantly provides:
The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH) on 5 March 2015 issued a decision (case no. IX ZR 133/14, available here) that is of immense relevance for all creditors and debtors that face the need of a subordination agreement (Rangrücktrittvereinbarung) under German law.
Proprietary trading. Reuters reported that Latvia, which currently holds the European Union presidency, opposes a proposal that would prohibit European banks from engaging in proprietary trading. (3/31/2015) Proprietary trading.
Die Frage der Kompetenzverteilung zwischen dem Vorstand und der Hauptversammlung der AG ist ein Dauerthema des Aktienrechts. Der Autor entwickelt ein eigenes Konzept zur dogmatischen Begründung ungeschriebener Hauptversammlungskompetenzen und untersucht, ob für den Börsenrückzug und die fakultative Insolvenzantragstellung eine Zustimmung der Hauptversammlung erforderlich ist. Der Autor lehnt die Frosta-Entscheidung des BGH ab und vertritt die Ansicht, dass der Börsenrückzug (reguläres Delisting wie auch das Downlisting) wertungsmäßig mit den in § 119 Abs. 1 Nr.