For industry professionals in India, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, has been a game-changer. The introduction of a formal framework for insolvency resolution has brought much-needed clarity and efficiency to dealing with financial distress. However, the 2019 Regulations introduced a new dimension - the ability for personal guarantors (PGs) to initiate insolvency proceedings. This has significantly impacted the role of Resolution Professionals (RPs).
In 2019, Congress enacted the Small Business Reorganization Act, which created subchapter V within chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Congress’ intent was to create a more cost-efficient and streamlined restructuring process for small businesses by modifying certain provisions of chapter 11 for debtors with claims below a specific debt cap. In particular, because creditors typically have smaller claims against these small businesses, the new subchapter takes into account the likelihood that there will be no or minimal meaningful creditor participation.
In early February, a Delaware bankruptcy judge set new precedent by granting a creditors’ committee derivative standing to pursue breach of fiduciary duty claims against a Delaware LLC’s members and officers. At least three prior Delaware Bankruptcy Court decisions had held that creditors were barred from pursuing such derivative claims by operation of Delaware state law, specifically under the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (the “DLLCA”).
近年来,由于经济形势下行叠加新冠疫情,众多企业陷入经营困难和债务危机,庭外债务重组因具有较高的灵活性、自主性,不受时间和程序上的限制,成为化解企业债务危机的重要方式,而敏感债权因其涉众性成为庭外债务重组程序中的棘手问题。敏感债权往往与非法集资有着千丝万缕的联系,本文将从庭外重组中涉非(涉嫌非法集资)敏感债权处置角度出发,具体分析敏感债权处置方案中的重点法律问题,以及律师在涉非敏感债权处置中的作用。
一、敏感债权的概念与特征
(一)敏感债权的概念
正如庭外重组一样,对于敏感债权,法律尚未给出明确的定义。结合过往庭外重组等债务风险处置案例,可以将敏感债权理解为:因涉及众多自然人债权人,可能涉嫌非法集资,而需要在债务处置中特别考虑的债权,主要包括涉及个人的理财产品和民间集资。
(二)敏感债权的特征
敏感债权的主要特点如下:
1. 债权人一般为自然人,且人数众多,具有涉众性特点。敏感债权一般涉及众多自然人债权人,这类群体抗风险能力一般较差,企业债务危机爆发后,如果无法及时清偿敏感债权,可能诱发群体性事件,影响社会稳定。
Das StaRUG gibt Unternehmen die Möglichkeit, sich frühzeitig, im Rahmen eines geordneten Verfahrens und außerhalb eines Insolvenzverfahrens, zu sanieren.
One of the most stressful situations that a company director can face is their business becoming insolvent.
With the worry of fighting to keep the organisation from falling into administration or being wound up, it is easy to forget that directors’ duties remain applicable.
In fact, the risks and responsibilities increase when a company is in financial strife. This article explains everything you need to know about complying with directors’ duties when your company is insolvent.
The overriding duty
Over the years, I’ve heard lots of people say, “Bankruptcy abuse is a huge problem,” as a self-evident and undeniable proposition.
But here’s the thing. Debtors who try to abuse the bankruptcy system rarely get away with it. That’s because there are too many gatekeepers—and no debtor can fool them all!
The gatekeepers are debtor’s counsel, creditors and their attorneys, U.S. Trustees, bankruptcy courts, and appellate courts.
This Quickguide outlines some practical considerations for companies whose contractual counterparties are experiencing financial distress, including what questions may be asked of the counterparty in relation to its distress and how to negotiate payment terms or recover debts.
1. Overview
In In re Hal Luftig Company, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Judge Denise L. Cote), denied confirmation of a Subchapter V plan of reorganization that contained a nonconsensual release of a non-debtor party.
Background
引言
近期,香港高等法院正式颁布针对一家大型港股公司(“港股公司”)的清盘令并委任清盘人。这宗债项涉及约数十亿美元的清盘呈请终于落下帷幕,也成为香港有史以来涉及金额最大的清盘案件之一。不少客户均希望了解,香港法下这类清盘对债权人利益及权利之影响。我们将持续推出系列文章,为大家介绍有关内容。
案情简介
根据香港公司清盘法律规定,公司任何一位债权人、股东或公司本身均可通过向高等法院提交清盘呈请书发起针对该公司的强制清盘。就该案而言,数月前港股公司的一债权人入禀香港高等法院,对港股公司提起清盘呈请(“呈请”)。该清盘呈请提出后,历经多次聆讯及延期申请,香港高等法院最终针对港股公司颁布了清盘令。
债权人对清盘债务人的行动
一旦公司进入强制清盘程序,根据香港公司清盘法律规定,所有针对该公司的诉讼程序均会自动中止。该规定目的在于确保清盘程序的有序进行,公司资产不会被用于提起或辩护任何法律程序,以保护公司财产和债权人利益。