Der Anwalt haftet, wenn er seinen Mandanten fälschlicherweise nicht über die Insolvenzreife aufklärt. Allerdings nur, wenn die Prüfung der Insolvenzreife Gegenstand des Beratungsvertrages geworden ist. Den Gegenstand des Beratungsvertrages muss der Mandant darlegen und beweisen. Die Anforderungen an diese Darlegungs- und Beweislast dürfen jedoch nicht überhöht werden, so der BGH in seinem Beschluss vom 26.01.2023 (Az. III ZR 91/22).

This article was first published on India Business Law Journal on 22 June 2023.

In M Suresh Kumar Reddy v Canara Bank and Ors, the Supreme Court clarified that its observations inVidarbha Industries Power Limited v Axis Bank Limited were restricted to the particular facts of that case. Therefore, except in exceptional circumstances, National Company Law Tribunals (NCLT) must admit applications under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), once the existence of a debt and default is established.

In Vincent Cold Storage Pty Ltd v Centuria Property Funds No 2 Limited (No 2) [2023] VSC 314, the Deed Administrator sought section 444F orders to restrain the property owner from retaking premises leased by Vincent Cold Storage in administration and was unsuccessful.

Key takeaways

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a contrary trial court ruling and joined with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in holding that a Chapter 13 trustee is not entitled to a percentage fee of plan payments as compensation for her work in a Chapter 13 case when the case is dismissed prior to confirmation.

A copy of the opinion in Evans v. McCallister (In re Evans) is available at: Link to Opinion.

The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA) has recently in Re Guy Kwok-Hung Lam^[1] confirmed that, where a dispute in respect of a petition debt is subject to an exclusive jurisdiction clause (EJC), the Hong Kong court should gen

The Court of Appeal has set aside a freezing order obtained by a provisional liquidator within winding up proceedings, on the basis that the cross-undertaking in damages given by him was inadequate because it was limited to the amount recovered for the estate. The liquidator had not discharged the burden of showing good reason to depart from the “default position” that a cross-undertaking should be unlimited in amount: Hunt v Ubhi [2023] EWCA Civ 417.

The Commercial Chamber of the French Supreme Court ("Cour de cassation") has recently handed down a decision of particular interest for distressed M&A transactions: Cass. com. 1er mars 2023, no. 21-14.787, FS-B.

Alexandre Koenig, partner and head of the firm's restructuring and insolvency practice in France analyses the legal and practical consequences of this decision for sellers of French distressed companies.

Context

In Matter of Texxon Petrochemicals, L.L.C., 67 F.4th 259 (5th Cir. 2023), the Fifth Circuit held that even if an appeal is equitably moot, the appellate court nonetheless has appellate jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal, without reaching the issue of equitable mootness.

Directors and officers should take note of a recent decision from the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York concerning access to D&O insurance policy proceeds. In In re SVB Financial Group, Case No. 23-10367 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.

Little can be more frustrating to an association than when a non-compliant homeowner files for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy laws are complex, and navigating them can be a challenge even for the most sophisticated managers. One of the broadest protections for homeowners that file bankruptcy is the “automatic stay.” This provision of the bankruptcy code immediately halts all efforts to enforce any claim against the debtor that may affect the homeowner’s property, including collection of overdue assessments and non-compliance fees.