In the March 2024 edition of the Restructuring Department Bulletin, we highlight recent decisions and developments impacting the restructuring arena and share the latest news on the Paul, Weiss Restructuring Department.
The right to effectively avoid the illegitimate removal of assets from a company in financial difficulties is a key element of any insolvency law that protects the rights of creditors and maximises the recovery of value from the insolvent company.
Czech insolvency law, and in particular the insolvency avoidance rights, play a significant role as a recovery tool for creditors in insolvency proceedings, but in practice mainly act as a preventive warning signal for a debtor and its creditors when trading, even before financial problems arise.
The EU directive harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law, a Propo
The transition to online shopping, interest rate increases, labor costs, maturing debt and rising inflation have collectively taken a significant toll on the retail industry, contributing to store closures and a growing number of bankruptcy filings by retail companies in recent years. Nearly 30 retailers sought bankruptcy protection in 2023. Some retailers have even filed for bankruptcy twice.
Hungarian insolvency law already knows the concept of avoidance actions. Allowing creditors and liquidators to challenge certain transactions aims to protect the value of the insolvency estate. Although the principles of Hungarian insolvency law are the same as those outlined in the European Commission's proposal for a Directive (i.e. Proposed Directive), there are some aspects which would need to be carefully thought through before they are harmonised.
Introduction
In the course of bankruptcy proceedings, the disposition of property by the bankrupt is subject to a degree of control and restriction, requiring the consent or ratification of the Court. This protects the creditors from the unfair removal of property from the bankrupt's pool of assets.
Die Restrukturierung nach dem StaRUG kann unter den richtigen Voraussetzungen für Unternehmen eine sinnvolle Alternative zur außergerichtlichen Sanierung bzw. zum Insolvenzverfahren sein.
Con sentenza n. 4168 del 15 febbraio 2024, la Corte di Cassazione ha affermato che appare senz’altro idonea a giustificare l’eccezione di inadempimento e a paralizzare il diritto al compenso del professionista la condotta antigiuridica dell’organo sindacale che, in un’operazione di fusione societaria che ha prodotto un rilevante danno per la società incorporante, abbia omesso di verificare la situazione patrimoniale ed economica della società che si andava ad incorporare, anche mediante richiesta di documentazione.
一、中澳破产程序之差异概述
破产制度是一种集体性债务清偿程序，旨在帮助无法偿还债务的公司或个人解决财务困境，同时确保债权人能够获得公平的清偿。中国和澳大利亚破产制度差异很大，本文旨在高度总结两种法律体系下破产制度的主要区别。
在澳大利亚，关于企业破产的适用法律主要规定在澳大利亚《公司法》(Corporations Act 2001)第五章，主要包括接管程序（Receivership）、清算程序（Liquidation）以及自愿管理程序（Voluntary Administration）。而在我国2007年颁布的《企业破产法》中，则主要包含三个破产程序，即破产清算程序、和解程序以及重整程序。本文将从破产程序的启动标准以及适用情景两方面对中澳破产程序之差异进行简要分析。
（一）破产程序启动标准
1、澳大利亚《公司法》项下的破产程序启动
With the increase in global trade and business, often involving complex corporate structures in multiple jurisdictions, we expect to see a significant increase in cross-border insolvency and restructuring matters in coming years. This is especially the case with rapid advancements in technology and digital change driving “borderless” transactions and investments in every industry.