Capital call subscription credit facilities (each, a “Facility”) continued their positive momentum in 2013 and had an excellent year as an asset class. As in the recent past, investor (“Investor”) funding performance remained as pristine as ever, and the only exclusion events we are aware of involved funding delinquencies by noninstitutional Investors (in many cases subsequently cured). Correspondingly, we were not consulted on a single Facility payment event of default in 2013.
Luxembourg court decisions allow secured lenders to enforce Gecina share pledge.
A controversial insolvency dispute winding its way through courts in Spain and Luxembourg may reinforce the rights of secured lenders to enforce financial collateral within an insolvency proceeding. While the recent Luxembourg Tribunal decision enforcing a financial collateral pledge for payment default appears to favor the secured lenders, a potentially contradictory decision from the Spanish Commercial Courts throws the issue into uncertain territory.
Suite aux faillites d’une quinzaine de boutiques au mois de septembre dernier au centre-ville de Luxembourg et partant du constat de la disparition progressive des commerces en centre-ville ainsi que d’une baisse de la création d’entreprises dans le secteur du commerce de détail, l’ancien gouvernement a émis un avant-projet de loi sur le bail commercial le 4 octobre 2013 (ci-après « l’avant-projet » ou le « projet »).
Le droit de la faillite au Grand-Duché de Luxembourg est actuellement régi par les articles 437 et suivants du Code de Commerce et s’inspire en grande partie du droit et de la jurisprudence belges. La législation applicable en matière de faillite n’a cependant que très peu évolué depuis 1935. Le législateur luxembourgeois, au vu du nombre croissant de faillites prononcées ces dernières années, avait d’ores et déjà tenté de réformer ce droit par l’introduction d’un projet de loi en 2003, resté cependant lettre morte.
INTRODUCTION
Luxembourg is one of the leading domiciles worldwide for international investment vehicles. This leading position has arisen from the combination of the following core factors:
RESTRUCTURING - COURT PROCEDURES
Formal, court-driven restructuring proceedings are available into Luxembourg law, but for practical reasons, these are rarely used in practice.
Reprieve from payment procedure (sursis de paiement)
Usual Luxembourg security package
Luxembourg is one of the leading domiciles worldwide for international investment portfolio acquisition vehicles.
Acquisition financing are usually secured against the assets and cash flows of the target company as well as of the buyout vehicle.
In practice, given that a Luxembourg holding company generally does not have any operational activities, shares, receivables and cash on bank are the most important assets to cover.
Introduction
Luxembourg’s sophisticated financial services infrastructure, global brand recognition, full EU single market access and extensive double tax treaty network has lead to its development as a core jurisdiction for non-regulated investment structures. This has resulted in the domiciling of several tens of thousands of investment holding companies, many of which form part of globally recognised corporate groups or hold the portfolio investments of leading international investment funds.
Le 11 juin 2013, la Chambre des députés luxembourgeoise a voté une loi instaurant un droit de revendication en faveur de la personne qui a confié des biens meubles "incorporels" non fongibles à une entreprise qui est tombée en faillite (le dossier parlementaire peut être téléchargé ici). Il ressort des travaux préparatoires qu'une des hypothèses visées est la revendication de données et fichiers stockés via une solution "cloud" (informatique dématérialisée) chez un prestataire tiers.