With ruling No. 3450 of January 11, 2025, the Italian Supreme Court clarified, through an important decision, the concept of “expired debt,” placing it within the specific legal issue presented in the case. Specifically, the Court ruled that the bankruptcy clawback action under Article 67, paragraph 1, No.
“[T]his Court finds that the exceptions to discharge under §523(a) only apply to individuals in Subchapter V.”
- Spring, et al. v. Davidson and Blok Industries, Inc. (In re Davidson; In re Blok Industries, Inc.; Jointly Administered), Adv. No. 23-3005, Doc. 87, at 15 (Bankr., N.D. Fla., decided February 14, 2025).
Facts
We're often asked to advise on what is the appropriate level of liquidated damages for delay in a building contract. Whilst this is a commercial issue and therefore outside the remit of legal advice there are some principles relating to the application of liquidated damages that we can bring to the parties' attention.
The lines continue to blur between arrangements under corporate and insolvency statutes.
In Xplore Inc. (Re), 2024 ONSC 5250, the Court broke new ground by granting the first reverse-vesting order (“RVO”) in a corporate plan of arrangement under the Canada Business Corporations Act (“CBCA”).
Con sentenza n. 3450 dell’11 gennaio 2025, la Suprema Corte di Cassazione ha chiarito, con un’interessante decisione, il concetto di “debito scaduto”, contestualizzandolo nella questione di diritto alla stessa presentata. Nello specifico, la Corte di Cassazione ha stabilito che si applichi la revocatoria fallimentare ex art. 67, comma 1, n. 4, L.F. (ora art.
The much-anticipated UK Supreme Court decision in El-Husseiny and another v Invest Bank PSC [2025] UKSC 4 was released recently, providing much-needed clarity to creditors and officeholders about the application of section 423 Insolvency Act 1986 to transactions involving debtors and company structures. Creditors and officeholders alike will be pleased with this decision, as the Court determined that the language and purpose of section 423 are such that a ‘transaction’ is not confined to dealing with an asset owned by the debtor.
If the overarching theme of 2024 was continued uncertainty (Ten litigation trends to watch for 2024), 2025 already looks set to be another unpredictable year. Various doom-laden economic forecasts indicate that 2025 will be a challenging year for the UK economy.
In this article Leon Breakey explains some of the issues that can arise when an English bankruptcy order is issued and the debtor owns property in Scotland.
When an English debtor with an interest in heritable property in Scotland is made bankrupt under English law, a crucial question arises: how can the English bankruptcy order be enforced in Scotland? This article explores this issue, highlighting the potential risks for trustees and the solution provided by Section 426 of the Insolvency Act 1986.
The Issue: English Bankruptcy Orders and Scottish Property
ICC Judge Burton’s judgment in Dale & Ors v BDO LLP (Re NMCN PLC and NMCN Sustainable Solutions Ltd) [2025] EWHC 446 (Ch) follows an administrators’ application under ss 235 and 236 Insolvency Act 1986 for the former company auditors, BDO LLP, to deliver up audit files for 2018 and 2019 to enable the administrators to investigate whether BDO had breached duties owed to the companies. The application was resisted. The points of contention were:
(1) whether, as the companies’ auditors, BDO were an “officer” for the purposes of s 235;
Given the increased intertwining of national economies, cross-border insolvency presents salient legal and financial difficulty. Upon the existence of an insolvent debtor in more than one country, the necessity to deal with assets and/or creditors creates very complicated jurisdictional problems and other legal issues. Most of the time, a company will operate in several jurisdictions and hence face very complicated transnational insolvency scenarios.