Corporate Group Issues

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Enterprise Group ◽  
Insolvency Proceeding ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Corporate Group ◽  
Economic Phenomenon ◽  
Legal Foundation ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

Since the last decade of the last century, the need to treat an enterprise group in insolvency proceedings as one unit is looking for an adequate legislative answer. An efficient administration of insolvency proceedings related to companies belonging to the same group would minimise costs and loss of time, should minimise losses for creditors, employers and shareholders of the companies, assembled in the group and would maximise the groups’ value. However, national insolvency laws applicable in the EU as well as international proposals are based on the central principle of insolvency law, generally being the principle of the five one’s: one insolvent debtor, one estate, one insolvency proceeding, one court, and one insolvency office holder. It is rather complex to apply this strict legal foundation to the economic phenomenon of a group of companies. Remarkably, however, as of 26 June 2017 the EIR (2015) applies a novelty in that groups of companies are addressed in some twenty legislative provisions, in an aim to ‘… ensure the efficient administration of insolvency proceedings relating to different companies forming part of a group of companies’.

scholarly journals THE HARMONIZATION OF THE AVOIDANCE RULES IN EUROPEAN UNION INSOLVENCIES

2016 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Keay
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Regulation ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCross-border transactions and resultant legal proceedings often cause problems. One major problem is knowing which law should govern the transaction and any legal proceedings. Cross-border insolvencies in the EU are subject to the European Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings (EIR) but this legislation does not determine which substantive insolvency law rules apply in a given insolvency. There are many differences in the insolvency rules applicable in the various EU Member States and this has caused concern in relation to the avoidance of transactions entered into by an insolvent prior to the opening of insolvency proceedings. In light of this, the paper examines options to address divergence between national avoidance rules. One option, harmonization, is analysed as well as its possible benefits and drawbacks.

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do – What Brexit Means for UK Insolvency and Restructuring Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-376
Author(s):  
Gerard McCormack
Keyword(s):  
Automatic Recognition ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Insolvency Regulation ◽  
Corporate Restructurings ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This paper asks whether the UK can maintain its insolvency and restructuring pre-eminence post Brexit i. e. after Britain’s departure from the European Union (EU). In the past 20 years or so, the UK is said to have become the insolvency and restructuring capital of Europe or in less politically correct terms, the bankruptcy brothel of Europe. In part, this is because of the European Insolvency Regulation which provides for automatic recognition of insolvency proceedings opened in a EU Member State in the other EU Member States. Such proceedings may make provision for the discharge of debts and the restructuring of financial obligations.The specific insolvency law regime is part of a more general European Private International Law framework. With Brexit, the UK has now left this framework without any negotiated replacement agreement, a so-called ‘skinny’ Brexit. The loss of the ability to deal with insolvencies and corporate restructurings through a single process, with automatic recognition across the EU, may make it more complex, lengthy and expensive to resolve cross-border cases. It gives rise to the prospect of parallel proceedings in different jurisdictions. The paper also addresses how any disadvantages associated with the ‘skinny’ Brexit may be alleviated.

Debt Restructuring in Germany

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reinhard Bork
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Majority Vote ◽  
German Law ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Debt Restructuring ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

For a long time, German restructuring and insolvency law had no pre-insolvency restructuring scheme binding on dissenting creditors. Only in opened insolvency proceedings a restructuring plan could be used for debt restructuring. Now the German legislators has taken means to improve German law in three ways: first, by updating the German Bond Act (also known as the German Debenture Act), especially through permitting the change of the bond conditions by a majority vote of the creditors if the conditions allow for such majority vote; second, by improving German insolvency law through the “Act for the Further Simplification of Company Restructuring (ESUG)” which enables the debtor to start early restructuring preparation proceedings (“protective umbrella proceedings”); and, third, by announcing the introduction of new pre-insolvency restructuring proceedings as a reaction to the EU Directive proposed by the European Commission on 22 November 2016.

Moss, Fletcher and Isaacs on the EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Complete Analysis ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Run Up ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

This practical book provides complete analysis of the revised EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings (EIR), the main Regulation on cross-border insolvencies in the EU. This is an essential work for anyone who requires knowledge of insolvency law in the UK or in any of the other 26 EU countries to which the Regulation is directly applicable. Timed to take into account the final amended version of the EIR, this third edition of the leading work contains detailed analysis and opinion on the effect of the changes to Regulation in practice. It also considers the numerous ECJ and relevant national cases which have been decided since the last edition. As in previous editions the work is organised thematically with chapters considering jurisdiction, choice of law rules, enforcement, security, and financial services. Chapter 8 provides an article-by-article commentary of the Regulation itself. This is the leading work on the subject in English and has been cited by numerous courts in the EU, including the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice in the Eurofood case and by the appelate courts of Austria in Re: Stojevic. It is a must-have reference work for lawyers advising on insolvencies with an international element and provides valuable resource in the run up to implementation of the amended Regulation in 2017.

scholarly journals Cross-Border Insolvency Law in Europe: Present Status and Future Prospects

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 67
Author(s):  
Bob Wessels
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
European Court ◽  
Insolvency Regulation ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

In May 2007 the European countries celebrated the first lustrum of the EU Insolvency Regulation (1346/2000). This article describes where Europe stands with its model which is based on well known theories of private international law for dealing with cross-border insolvencies. The EU Insolvency Regulation provides for a national court to exercise international jurisdiction to open insolvency proceedings. The basis for international jurisdiction is the debtor’s “centre of main interests” or COMI. The two most important cases decided by the European Court of Justice (17 January 2006 Staubitz Schreiber and 2 May 2006 Eurofood) are discussed. The article further analyses the regulation’s legal concept and its procedural context and explains that 'financial institutions' are not covered by the Insolvency Regulation, but by separate directives (2001/17; 2001/24). After having taken stock several suggestions are submitted for improvement of the system of cross-border insolvency in Europe.

scholarly journals Corporate Insolvency Proceedings: A Case of Visegrad Four

2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 235-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zuzana Crhová ◽  
Zuzana Fišerová ◽  
Marie Paseková
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Insolvency Proceeding ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Economic Slowdown ◽  
Corporate Insolvency ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
Legal Entities

Insolvency proceeding and liquidation of bankrupt companies are important topics in days of economic slowdown which affected all economies after financial crisis. This paper aims to find main differences between insolvency proceedings in the countries of Visegrad four. The main goal is to describe insolvency law in member countries and then to compare it from the poin of view of main actors. This comparison can help to find which changes and ideas could be applied to improve and make more effective the Czech insolvency system. The countries of Visegrad four was selected because of their common history and similar economic development. First of all, the legal background of insolvency proceedings which is possible for legal entities in these countries is examined. Then this paper deals with insolvency proceedings from the point of view of their participants – creditors, debtors and insolvency administrator. We have found that insolvency proceedings in these countries are very similar but there is still some inspiration for the Czech insolvency system.

scholarly journals Harmonising insolvency law in the EU : New thoughts on old ideas in the wake of the COVID ‐19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilie Ghio ◽  
Gert‐Jan Boon ◽  
David Ehmke ◽  
Jennifer Gant ◽  
Line Langkjaer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Insolvency Law ◽  
The Eu

The law applicable to third-party effects of assignment and the conflict rules for insolvency according to EU law

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 664-684
Author(s):  
Christian Heinze ◽  
Cara Warmuth
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Good Opportunity ◽  
Insolvency Regulation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In March 2018, the European Commission issued its proposal for a regulation on the law applicable to third-party effects of assignments of claims, aiming to put an end to the ongoing debate on this issue and the legal uncertainty associated with it. On the basis of the Commission’s decision in favour of the application of the law of the assignor’s habitual residence, this article discusses the consequences of the Proposal under European Union (EU) insolvency law. For that purpose, the coherence of the Proposal with the Insolvency Regulation will be examined, first in general and then in more detail. The analysis comes to the result that the Commission’s objective of aligning the Proposal with the legal framework of the Insolvency Regulation has predominantly been well achieved. The authors point out remaining minor inaccuracies that may be clarified in the further legislative process or by later case law. It is concluded that, from the perspective of international insolvency law, the proposed uniform conflict-of-laws rule at the EU level offers a good opportunity to promote legal certainty with regard to cross-border assignments of claims in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document