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

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.

Anwendbares Recht und Anerkennung bei gesellschaftsrechtlichen Maßnahmen in Sanierungsplanverfahren

The study examines classification and recognition issues that arise in the scope of application of the European Insolvency Regulation if corporate measures are implemented by way of a restructuring plan in deviation from company law requirements. The study analyzes German, English, French and Italian restructuring plan proceedings. It also takes a closer look at the interaction of corporate and insolvency law provisions during the restructuring of foreign companies in reorganization plan proceedings. The author practises as a lawyer in the field of restructuring.

4 Private International Law

This chapter begins by analysing the relevant Private International Law rules under EU law. This analysis distinguishes between non-insolvency and insolvency law rules. Outside of insolvency, the rules for the determination of jurisdiction and the recognition of court judgements, as well as the rules for the determination of the law to be applied, are to be found in different statutory EU instruments. If the dispute at hand qualifies as an insolvency matter, an important distinction must be made regarding the qualification of the parties. If the insolvent entity - whether that be the collateral provider or collateral taker - qualifies as an investment firm or a credit institution, the court's jurisdiction is to be determined under the Winding-up Directive, or, more precisely, under the relevant, national rules implementing this Directive. If the insolvent entity does not qualify as an investment firm or a credit institution, the European Insolvency Regulation (EIR Recast) determines the jurisdiction of the insolvency court and the law that the court must apply. The chapter then considers US law in the contexts outside of insolvency and within insolvency, both with respect to questions of jurisdiction in the event of a dispute between the parties as well as of choice of the law governing securities holdings and dispositions.