This week’s TGIF considers a recent case in which the Federal Court of Australia upheld a liquidator’s decision to reject a proof of debt for damages relating to a failed sale of commercial property.
Key takeaways
New fees are soon to be introduced by The Insolvency Service in respect of the insolvency deposit required to commence a creditor’s bankruptcy petition and winding-up petition which will make it harder for many businesses to collect their debts.
Key takeaways for directors
A significant decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom was released last week, BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and others, confirming the existence of a duty owed to the company by its directors to consider the interests of the company's creditors when the company becomes insolvent or approaches insolvency.
As expressed by the Supreme Court, the so-called "creditor duty" reflects a sliding scale:
Lately, the global economic market has been tumultuousMajor changes such as inflation and interest rate hikes may cause individuals or legal entities to fall into the abyss of insolvency. According to the Consumer Debt Clearance Statute and the Bankruptcy Act, if a debtor is unable to repay his/her debts, he/she may clear his/her debts according to the rehabilitation or liquidation process set out by the Consumer Debt ClearanceStatute, or file an application for bankruptcy in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act. Both are procedures to help debtors clear their debts.
In this alert, we review an important UK Supreme Court decision, which confirms that the fiduciary duties of directors to act in good faith in the interests of the company should, where insolvency[1] is imminent or insolvent liquidation or administration is probable, be interpreted as including the interests of its creditors.
近來全球經濟市場瞬息萬變,通貨膨脹、利息調升等重大變動,可能造成個人或法人步入不能清償債務的萬丈深淵。按消費者債務清理條例、破產法之規定,債務人若有不能清償債務之情形時,得依消費者債務清理條例聲請更生、清算,或依破產法聲請破產,二者都是協助債務人清理債務之程序,但從司法案件統計上,准駁情形卻有相當大的差異。
依司法院民國110年統計年報有關「地方法院消債聲請事件終結情形」之統計數字,自101年起至110年止聲請更生事件總計為33,997件,裁准更生之案件總計為24,699件(裁准比率為72.7%);聲請清算事件總計為9,995件,裁定開始清算之案件總計為7,984件(裁准比率為79.9%)。
然而,有關「地方法院民事破產事件終結情形」同期間之統計數字,聲請破產事件總計僅有2,013件,而宣告破產之案件更只有287件(裁准比率為14.3%)。二者同為清理債務之程序,同樣期待債務人能夠透過債務清理程序重獲新生,何以破產事件不論是案件數量或裁准比率,均大幅低於更生或清算事件?
這些聲請破產之個人或法人,在破產程序中,究竟是因為什麼原因而被法院駁回聲請?或許可以從法院駁回破產聲請的理由,探知我國破產程序何以難如登天。
The High Court has recently held that the appointment of administrators by a sole director of a company with unamended Model Articles was valid.
Background
The document allegedly appointing the administrators of the company was a standard set of board minutes, reportedly chaired by a man and recording that a quorum was present. In fact, there was no meeting, and the decision was taken alone by the sole female director.
What is the so-called "creditor duty"?
This is the duty, introduced into English common law by the leading case of West Mercia Safetywear v Dodd1 in 1988, of company directors to consider, or act in accordance with, the interests of the company's creditors when the company becomes insolvent, or when it approaches, or is at real risk of insolvency.
Background
事業再生・債権管理Newsletter 2022年10月号 6 本ニュースレターの発行元は弁護士法人大江橋法律事務所です。弁護士法人大江橋法律事務所は、1981年に設立された日本の総合法律事務所です。東京、大阪、名古屋、海外は上海にオフィスを構えており、主に企業法務 を中心とした法的サービスを提供しております。本ニュースレターの内容は、一般的な情報提供に止まるものであり、個別具体的なケースに関する法的アドバイスを想定したものではありません。本ニュースレターの内容につきま しては、一切の責任を負わないものとさせて頂きます。法律・裁判例に関する情報及びその対応等については本ニュースレターのみに依拠されるべきでなく、必要に応じて別途弁護士のアドバイスをお受け頂ければと存じます。 他の連帯債務者との関係で債務が消滅した場合における、 既になされた弁済の「法律上の原因」の有無 ~大阪地裁令和3年9月16日判決にみる弁済後の不当利得返還請求の可否~ 第1 はじめに 「法律上の原因」がない経済的利益の移転が生じた場合、 当該経済的利益の移転によって損失を被った者から、利益を 受けた者に対して、不当利得返還請求がなされることがありま す(民法703条)。
The recent decision of the UK Supreme Court in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SAV & Ors [2022] UKSC 25 has considered the nature of the so-called “creditor duty” and whether directors are required to take into account the interests of creditors when the company is “insolvent, bordering on insolvency, or that an insolvent liquidation or administration is probable.”
The Sequana decision also provides guidance about when the so-called “creditor duty” is engaged.
Background