1.- Antecedentes

I. Transmisión de la unidad productiva como garantía de viabilidad de la empresa. Una remisión al régimen laboral en la sucesión de empresas 1. Una de las novedades más interesantes desde la perspectiva laboral de la reforma operada en la Ley Concursal (Ley 22/03, 9 jul., BOE, 10, en adelante LC) por el RD-L. 11/14, 5 sep., BOE, 6 es la incorporación de un régimen jurídico especial para el supuesto de que se produzca la transmisión de unidades productivas en el proceso concursal (nuevo art. 146 bis LC). La regla de la que parte el art.

Spanish Royal Decree-Law 4/2014, passed on March 7 2014, has considerably changed the rules for the court-sanctioning of so-called Spanish schemes of arrangement. Amongst those changes, the reform has lowered the majorities required to achieve a Spanish scheme. Currently, a majority of at least 51% of the financial liabilities held by all creditors at the time of the refinancing agreement (acuerdo de refinanciación) approval, will suffice to request the insolvency judge to sanction the agreement, so it is considered ringfenced and protected from any challenge for rescission.

La reforma aparecida en el BOE del sábado 6 de septiembre plantea problemas sistemáticos y de fondo que no pueden ser tratados en esta nota, con la que se pretende orientar a los operadores en las reglas y problemas que prima facie sugiere la lectura de la norma. Evidentemente, hay que esperar nuevos productos legislativos, de ajuste de la presente reforma con la que se introdujo por el RD 4/2014.

The fourth additional provision of the Spanish Insolvency Act (IA) provides for homologation (court sanctioning) of a refinancing agreement signed by creditors representing at least 51 per cent of financial liabilities whilst meeting certain conditions set out in article 71 bis at the time of adoption of said agreement.

Exposición de la doctrina de la rescisión aislada del derecho de garantía 1. Establece el art. 73 LCon que (1) la sentencia que estime la acción (rescisoria) declarará la ineficacia del acto impugnado y condenará a la restitución de las prestaciones objeto de aquél (…). (3) El derecho a la prestación que resulte a favor de cualquiera de los demandados como consecuencia de la rescisión tendrá la consideración de crédito contra la masa, que habrá de satisfacerse simultáneamente a la reintegración de los bienes (…). 2.

The new amendments carried out in the BankruptcyProceedings Act by virtue of the Royal Decree 4/2014,dated March 7, aims to introduce a viable restructuringof corporate debt, trying to streamline BankruptcyProceedings and prevailing primacy of will.

The Spanish Supreme Court has established the legalconcept of insolvency as an objective requirement forthe Declaration of Insolvency pursuant to Section 2.1 ofthe bankruptcy Act by virtue of the decision taken by the Court on April 1, 2014.

Financial institutions are not de facto directors of the insolvent company because they do not significantly affect the performance of the insolvent company’s activity, but only ensure that  certain costs do not affect the repayment of their loan.

The extension of the term for the delivery of works not authorized by the guarantor that had secured  the penalty for delay does not  harm it and, therefore, the guarantee is not  extinguished;  any increase in the  penalty agreed does not extinguish the guarantee,  but  cannot be enforceable on the guarantor that will be liable in the terms agreed in the initial  agreement. This decision discussed the effects  on the guarantee of  the novation of the  secured  obligation agreed without the guarantor’s knowledge.