If a company faces a situation threatening insolvency, the satisfaction of creditors' claims is at risk. In such cases, the company's managers must prioritize the interests of the creditors, and for failure to do so, they are subject to civil and/or criminal liability, which we describe in this article.

Overview

Liquidator remuneration in insolvency proceedings often raises difficult questions; especially in large corporate collapses where the work is extensive and the stakes are high. Courts must balance fair compensation with creditor protection, but approaches to fee assessment have varied across jurisdictions, leading to uncertainty and dispute.

Insolvency and liquidation proceedings inevitably raise the question of how competing creditor claims are ranked. One area of particular importance is the treatment of employee claims, as legislators typically grant them special protection to safeguard livelihoods. Hungarian insolvency law reflects this policy by granting priority status to certain employee entitlements.

When Do Employee Claims Rank Ahead of Other Creditors?

What are antecedent transactions in insolvency?

The recent NCLT Kochi Bench judgment in Regional Provident Fund Commissioner vs.

In insolvency and liquidation proceedings, the question regularly arises of how competing creditor claims should be satisfied. Of particular importance is the treatment of employee claims, as legislators typically seek to ensure their special protection. Hungarian insolvency law addresses this concern by granting certain employee claims a privileged ranking.

When do employee claims take precedence over other creditors?

Introduction

Voluntary liquidation is the mechanism available to solvent limited liability companies in the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”) where the shareholders decide to bring the company’s operations to an orderly end. Unlike compulsory liquidation, which is triggered by insolvency or court order, voluntary liquidation reflects a decision of the shareholders to dissolve the company while it remains able to discharge its obligations in full.

In a groundbreaking decision of particular importance to participants in Chapter 15 proceedings, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an opinion making clear that defendants in Chapter 15 proceedings may have Safe Harbor defenses even when a liquidator brings non-U.S. common law claims. This decision, issued on August 5, 2025 in Fairfield Sentry, holds that when a liquidator uses a US Bankruptcy Court to pursue non-U.S. common law claims, it must abide by the safe harbor afforded by Section 546(e) of the U.S.

After a bankruptcy is declared, the director does not disappear from the picture. Although the trustee takes over the liquidation, the former director may be personally liable for the deficit in the estate or for damages suffered by individual creditors. This article clearly explains when liability is imminent and what measures you can take in advance.

Trustee versus director

Under Turkish law, a joint-stock company’s liquidation follows its termination and ends with its deregistration. If the process is found incomplete—due to overlooked assets or ongoing disputes—supplementary liquidation allows temporary reinstatement of the company’s legal personality to finalize unresolved matters.

Introduction