Sometimes a debtor is liable for fraud that she did not personally commit,” held the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 22, 2023, when the debtor’s business partner had deceptively obtained money by fraud, thereby making the innocent partner liable for a nondischargeable debt under Bankruptcy Code (Code) §523(a)(2)(A) (“any debt from money “obtained by … fraud” not dischargeable and survives debtor’s bankruptcy). Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, 2023 WL 2144417 (Feb. 22, 2023).

On 28 September 2022, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporate and Financial Services (“Committee”) began an inquiry into corporate insolvency in Australia, the first of its kind in over 30 years. The Committee invited submissions from interested persons and stakeholders to provide recommendations on how best to improve Australia’s corporate insolvency framework. Submissions have now closed, with contributions from over 50 industry bodies, government bodies and various representative bodies and groups.

Introduction

Question: Can a creditor prevent its debtor from filing bankruptcy by pre-petition contract terms?

Answer: No . . . according to In re Roberson Cartridge Co., LLC, Case No. 22-20192 in the Northern Texas Bankruptcy Court (03/07/2023, opinion at Doc. 77).

Facts

1 2023 年 4 月 破産管財人による債務の承認と消滅時効の関係 ―別除権者との交渉過程等での債務承認に 消滅時効の中断の効力を認めた最新判例― 弁護士 関端 広輝/ 弁護士 片山 いずみ Ⅰ．破産手続開始後における被担保債権の回収 1．破産手続における担保権の取扱い（別除権） 破産法上、破産債権（破産法 2 条 5 項。破産者に対し破産手続開始前の原因に基づいて生じた財産上の請 求権であって、財団債権に該当しないもの。）は、破産手続によらなければ権利行使ができないことが原則とされ ています（同法 100 条、42 条 1 項・同条 2 項）。つまり、破産債権を有する債権者は、基本的には、破産手続 に従って配当を受けることしかできません。しかし、その例外の 1 つとされるのが「別除権」です。 FINANCIAL RESTRUCTURING GROUP NEWSLETTER 破産手続が開始された者の所有財産に担保権が設定されている場合、担保権者は、通常、自身の 有する被担保債権について、当該担保目的物からの回収を試みることになります。 そして、破産手続において破産管財人が選任されていれば、当該担保目的物の処遇や被担保債権 の回収に関し、担保権者が問い合わせや交渉等を行う相手は、当該破産管財人となります。

Bankruptcy lawyers recently gained access to a promising technology for improving the efficiency of tasks like drafting a motion for relief from stay. ChatGPT allows users to employ generative artificial intelligence by chatting with a chatbot on OpenAI’s website https://chat.openai.com/chat.

A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) in its recent judgment Abhishek Singh v. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd.

The High Court has clarified the grounds for challenging a CVA for guarantee creditors.

Background

Mizen Design/Build Ltd's (Mizen) directors proposed a CVA stating that this would lead to a better result for unsecured creditors than the likely alternative, administration.

The CVA compromised guarantee creditors' ability both to bring a claim against Mizen and to call upon their performance guarantees against Mizen's parent company (the Parent Guarantor).

Queensland tourism icon “The Big Pineapple” recently tasted sweet success in the Queensland Supreme Court with judgment setting aside a creditor’s statutory demand issued against it as part of an ongoing multi-million dollar dispute amongst investors.

OLG Schleswig, Beschluss v. 21.02.2023 – 2 Wx 50/22

Bei Eintragung einer neu gegründeten GmbH wird insbesondere auf die Einhaltung gläubigerschützender Vorschriften geachtet. So auch bei der Offenlegung des Gründungsaufwands, der Gesamtbetrag sowie die einzelnen Posten sind in der Satzung anzugeben.

Sachverhalt