In its judgment 500/2016 of July 19, 2016, the Supreme Court interprets article 62.4 of the Insolvency Act, regulating the effects of contract resolution during insolvency:
If an agency agreement is resolved due to the agent being declared insolvent, the business owner must compensate the agent for clientele if the requirements under the Agency Act are met (the agent brought new clients or clearly increased transactions with existing clients, and the previous activity is still beneficial for the business owner).
Como regla general, los créditos de los administradores de hecho contra la sociedad concursada que ellos administran (o han administrado) de facto serán clasificados como subordinados en los términos previstos en los artículos 92.5.º y 93.2.2.º de la Ley Concursal. Durante los dos años siguientes a la entrada en vigor de la Ley 17/2014, ha regido un régimen coyuntural que ha permitido que los créditos derivados de la aportación de «nuevos ingresos de tesorería» (fresh money) en el marco de acuerdos de refinanciación típicos escaparan a la postergación concursal.
Análisis GA&P | Mayo 2016 1 N. de la C.: En las citas literales se ha rectificado en lo posible —sin afectar al sentido— la grafía de ciertos elementos (acentos, mayúsculas, símbolos, abreviaturas, cursivas...) para adecuarlos a las normas tipográficas utilizadas en el resto del texto. 1.
Recent piece-meal amendments to the Spanish Insolvency Act 2003 seem to have cumulated into a restructuring solution that is starting to be considered predictable, quick and fair, especially when compared to the pre-amendment system. With its new restructuring approach, which shares many of the same characteristics as an English Scheme of Arrangement, Spanish companies have finally been given much-needed space and time to develop an appropriate restructuring strategy.
A ruling by the Supreme Court in Spain says Spanish banks that held deposits for property that was never built are to be held to account. Around 100,000 people in the UK are thought to have paid big sums towards such properties in Spain but these were lost when several developers went bust in the wake of 2008’s financial crisis. Estimates for how much British buyers could claim are around £4bn.
Judgment of the Supreme Court, Chamber One, Number 134/2016, 04 March
1. BACKGROUND
The Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment (the “Convention”) and theProtocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters specific to Aircraft Equipment (the “Protocol” collectively with the Convention, the “Cape Town Convention”) signed on November 16, 2001 establish a special regime for the protection of certain interests in aircraft objects (within the meaning given to such term in the Cape Town Convention, an “Aircraft Object”), and
Promociones Habitat SA, the Spanish residential homebuilder, has completed a €1.45 billion restructuring which was the first refinancing of an existing composition agreement using Spain’s new company rescue laws.
In 2008 Promociones Habitat SA (Habitat)applied for voluntary bankruptcy with accumulated liabilities of 2,840 million euros. Two years later, in 2010, Mercantile Court no. 3 of Barcelona approved the composition agreement with more than 80% adhering to the proposal.