In its ruling of April 18, 2024 (case no. IX ZR 129/22), the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) once again clarified that external lenders such as banks can be treated as shareholders under insolvency law under certain circumstances – especially if they are granted a position similar to that of a member through contractual provisions such as profit participation and investment reservation.

A secured creditor with a hypothec (charge) over a specific immovable property can enforce against that property without having to put the debtor through a full-blown bankruptcy process. That was one of the key outcomes of the Royal Court's decision in Representation of Prospect Holdings Limited[2025] JRC 164.

What happened?

Introduction

In this first instalment of our insights series on construction insolvency, Ironbridge Legal outlines key red flags to look for and practical steps to manage counterparty risk.

An Industry at Risk - With Contagion Potential

The UK Supreme Court recently handed down a judgment in Tradition Financial Services Ltd v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Others[1] in which it considered the scope of section 213 of the Insolvency Act 1986, specifically whether those beyond the small group of individuals with controlling or m

Subchapter V of chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code provides a streamlined reorganization process for small business debtors. Similar to a normal chapter 11 case, subchapter V allows a debtor to cramdown a plan without the approval of the unsecured class as long as certain requirements are satisfied.

The Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) (Amendment) Bill 2025 aims to provide greater protection to employees where their employer becomes insolvent. The Bill will allow greater access to a Social Insurance Fund to protect employee pay-related entitlements and claims for historic entitlements over the previous 40 years. The devil is in the detail, however, with very specific caps and limitations.

In Re King & Wood Mallesons and other matters [2025] SGHC 67, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore (High Court) granted recognition and reliefs under the UNCITRAL Model Law on CrossBorder Insolvency (Model Law) in respect of a consolidated reorganisation of three Chinese companies in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This decision provides guidance to insolvency office-holders appointed under PRC law on the procedural requirements to seek recognition under the Model Law in Singapore.

Introduction

In December 2024, Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) released an updated version of Regulatory Guide RG 217. The guidance is designed to assist directors in complying with their duty to prevent insolvent trading. It sets out four key principles for directors to avoid insolvent trading, explains the safe harbour defence (which offers protection from personal liability), and clarifies ASIC’s approach to assessing breaches of duty and the application of the safe harbour defence.

Court held that an insolvent company was required to provide adequate security when enforcing an adjudication decision.

Background

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”), was enacted to inter alia provide a consolidated framework to resolve insolvency in a time-bound manner and to maximise the value of assets. This objective is further aided by a moratorium under Section 14 that halts legal proceedings against the corporate debtor, and the immunity provision under Section 32A, which offers a fresh slate to resolution applicants upon plan approval.