Pub Date : 2019-03-31DOI: 10.1017/9781316711484.006
{"title":"The Austere Creditor: Austerity, Bankruptcy Policy and Government Debt Collection","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/9781316711484.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316711484.006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86971348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Cash flow and balance sheet insolvency tests are the two predominant means of determining insolvency. A company is cash flow or commercially insolvent if it is unable to pay its debts as they fall due. Balance sheet or technical insolvency occurs where the value of a company’s assets is less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account both contingent and prospective liabilities. The term liabilities is broader than debts as it encompasses liquidated and unliquidated liabilities arising from contracts, tort, restitution etc. Commercial insolvency is clearly the more prominent of the tests. In its analysis of resolving insolvency in assessing ease of doing business in Nigeria in 2019, the World Bank Group stated the basis for insolvency proceedings in Nigeria as being inability to pay debts as they mature. This typifies a widely held misconception that technical insolvency is not recognized under Nigerian law. Establishing commercial insolvency is comparatively easier. Commercial insolvency may be established by the neglect of a debtor to pay a single due debt. In the context of restructuring, a creditor’s immediate concern is often the debtor’s ability to make payments as they mature as opposed to whether its assets are sufficient to meet its present and future liabilities. Unsurprisingly, virtually all reported cases of winding-up of companies for inability to pay debts are premised on commercial insolvency under section 409(a) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 1990 (CAMA). Despite its seeming obscurity, balance sheet insolvency test is commonly employed in commercial transactions as an event of default. This provides counterparties with early warning signs in ongoing or long-term contracts where there are no avenues of making demands capable of triggering commercial insolvency.
{"title":"Establishing Corporate Insolvency: The Balance Sheet Insolvency Test","authors":"Dr Kubi Udofia","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3355248","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3355248","url":null,"abstract":"Cash flow and balance sheet insolvency tests are the two predominant means of determining insolvency. A company is cash flow or commercially insolvent if it is unable to pay its debts as they fall due. Balance sheet or technical insolvency occurs where the value of a company’s assets is less than the amount of its liabilities, taking into account both contingent and prospective liabilities. The term liabilities is broader than debts as it encompasses liquidated and unliquidated liabilities arising from contracts, tort, restitution etc. \u0000 \u0000Commercial insolvency is clearly the more prominent of the tests. In its analysis of resolving insolvency in assessing ease of doing business in Nigeria in 2019, the World Bank Group stated the basis for insolvency proceedings in Nigeria as being inability to pay debts as they mature. This typifies a widely held misconception that technical insolvency is not recognized under Nigerian law. \u0000 \u0000Establishing commercial insolvency is comparatively easier. Commercial insolvency may be established by the neglect of a debtor to pay a single due debt. In the context of restructuring, a creditor’s immediate concern is often the debtor’s ability to make payments as they mature as opposed to whether its assets are sufficient to meet its present and future liabilities. Unsurprisingly, virtually all reported cases of winding-up of companies for inability to pay debts are premised on commercial insolvency under section 409(a) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 1990 (CAMA). \u0000 \u0000Despite its seeming obscurity, balance sheet insolvency test is commonly employed in commercial transactions as an event of default. This provides counterparties with early warning signs in ongoing or long-term contracts where there are no avenues of making demands capable of triggering commercial insolvency.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89178415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper discusses the German conflict of law rules as they apply to companies (ie, the private international law of companies in Germany). Amongst others, it addresses the connecting factor, the scope of the lex societatis, outreach statutes and the possibility of reincorporations in German law. This paper is based on a project that examines this issue for all EU Member States, using a common template.
{"title":"The Private International Law of Companies in Germany","authors":"C. Gerner-Beuerle, M. Siems","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3355688","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3355688","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the German conflict of law rules as they apply to companies (ie, the private international law of companies in Germany). Amongst others, it addresses the connecting factor, the scope of the lex societatis, outreach statutes and the possibility of reincorporations in German law. This paper is based on a project that examines this issue for all EU Member States, using a common template.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89567673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-12DOI: 10.17159/1727-3781/2019/V22I0A5364
Z. Mabe
The problems faced by debtors in South Africa is not that there are no alternatives to insolvency proceedings, but that the available alternatives do not provide for a discharge of debt as with a sequestration order, which is ultimately what the debtor seeks to achieve. Debtors in South Africa can make use of debt review in terms of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 or administration orders in terms of the Magistrates' Court Act 32 of 1944 to circumvent the sequestration process. However, both debt review and administration orders do not provide for a discharge of debt and provide for debt-restructuring only, in order to eventually satisfy the creditor's claims. Attention is given to the sequestration process and the alternatives to sequestration as they relate specifically to the discharge or lack of a discharge of a debtor's debts. The South African law is compared to Kenyan Law. This article seeks to analyse the alternatives to the bankruptcy provisions of the newly enacted Kenyan Insolvency Act 18 of 2015 in order to influence the possible reform of insolvency law in South Africa. Like the South African Insolvency Act, the old Kenyan Bankruptcy Act (Cap 53 of the Laws of Kenya) also did not have alternatives to bankruptcy. The old Kenyan Bankruptcy Act, however, contained a provision on schemes of arrangement and compositions. The Kenyan Insolvency Act now caters for alternatives to bankruptcy and provides a wide range of alternatives to bankruptcy, some of which allow debtors in different financial positions to obtain a discharge.
{"title":"Alternatives to Bankruptcy in South Africa That Provides for a Discharge of Debts: Lessons from Kenya","authors":"Z. Mabe","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2019/V22I0A5364","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2019/V22I0A5364","url":null,"abstract":"The problems faced by debtors in South Africa is not that there are no alternatives to insolvency proceedings, but that the available alternatives do not provide for a discharge of debt as with a sequestration order, which is ultimately what the debtor seeks to achieve. Debtors in South Africa can make use of debt review in terms of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 or administration orders in terms of the Magistrates' Court Act 32 of 1944 to circumvent the sequestration process. However, both debt review and administration orders do not provide for a discharge of debt and provide for debt-restructuring only, in order to eventually satisfy the creditor's claims. Attention is given to the sequestration process and the alternatives to sequestration as they relate specifically to the discharge or lack of a discharge of a debtor's debts. The South African law is compared to Kenyan Law. This article seeks to analyse the alternatives to the bankruptcy provisions of the newly enacted Kenyan Insolvency Act 18 of 2015 in order to influence the possible reform of insolvency law in South Africa. Like the South African Insolvency Act, the old Kenyan Bankruptcy Act (Cap 53 of the Laws of Kenya) also did not have alternatives to bankruptcy. The old Kenyan Bankruptcy Act, however, contained a provision on schemes of arrangement and compositions. The Kenyan Insolvency Act now caters for alternatives to bankruptcy and provides a wide range of alternatives to bankruptcy, some of which allow debtors in different financial positions to obtain a discharge. \u0000 \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81687079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A suit which seeks to recover a debt or a liquidated demand in money payable by the defendant arising out of a written contract is maintainable under Order 37, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as a summary suit. It is settled law that invoices/ bills are “written contracts” within the contemplation of Order 37, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Suits claiming amounts which are only balances due at the foot of account cannot be treated as falling under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 because the suit claim is based on the account and the amount claimed is not a liquidated amount arising/payable to the plaintiff on the instruments of limited types as specified under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Entries and statements of account have necessarily to be proved as per Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for the balance at the foot of the account to be arrived at.
{"title":"Can an Invoice Be a Basis for Filing a Suit Under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908?","authors":"Shivam Goel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3337317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3337317","url":null,"abstract":"A suit which seeks to recover a debt or a liquidated demand in money payable by the defendant arising out of a written contract is maintainable under Order 37, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as a summary suit. It is settled law that invoices/ bills are “written contracts” within the contemplation of Order 37, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.<br><br>Suits claiming amounts which are only balances due at the foot of account cannot be treated as falling under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 because the suit claim is based on the account and the amount claimed is not a liquidated amount arising/payable to the plaintiff on the instruments of limited types as specified under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Entries and statements of account have necessarily to be proved as per Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for the balance at the foot of the account to be arrived at.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79277588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Russian Abstract: В статье рассматриваются ключевые доводы, которые обсуждаются в российском и зарубежном научном дискурсе применительно к вопросу о необходимости понижения в очередности (субординации) займов участников юридических лиц. Главными аргументами в пользу субординации являются злоупотребление принципом ограниченной ответственности, стимулирование более раннего открытия процедуры, недопустимость переноса финансовых рисков, создание ложной видимости платежеспособности и др. Основное возражение против состоит в том, что понижение в очередности дестимулирует попытки санации общества вне формальной процедуры несостоятельности (банкротства). Автор приходит к выводу, что изложенные аргументы наряду с зарубежным опытом должны приниматься во внимание при разработке оптимального регулирования в России. English Abstract: The author considers the key arguments that are discussed in the Russian and foreign scientific discourse in relation to the need to reduce the priority (subordination) of loans for members of legal entities. The main arguments in favor of subordination are the abuse of the limited liability principle, stimulation of an earlier opening of the procedure, inadmissibility of the transfer of financial risks, and the creation of false solvency, etc. The main objection is that the reduction in priority discourages the attempts to reorganize the company outside the formal insolvency (bankruptcy) procedure. The author reaches the conclusion that the presented arguments along with foreign experience should be taken into account in the development of an optimal regulation in Russia. Full text in Russian: https://zakon.ru/magazine/vestnik_ekonomicheskogo_pravosudiya_rf_ranee_vestnik_vas_rf/558.
俄罗斯Abstract:这篇文章讨论了俄罗斯和外国科学讨论的关键论点，涉及到需要减少法人的次级贷款。指挥系统的主要理由是滥用有限责任原则，鼓励提前发现程序，不允许金融风险转移，创造虚假的偿付能力，以及主要的反对意见是，次序下降会使社会脱离正式破产程序(破产)。提交人得出结论，在制定俄罗斯最优监管时，必须考虑到所提出的论点和外国经验。英国议会:在俄罗斯和其他地方分裂的钥匙执行者，他们需要一个传统的遗产。最受欢迎的艺术家是最受欢迎的艺术家，也是最受欢迎的音乐家，也是最受欢迎的音乐家。主要目标是先发制人的利益冲突，将formal insolvency (bankruptsi)排除在外。在俄罗斯的optimal regal开发项目中，领头的执政官长成了杰出的执政官。俄罗斯:https://zakon.ru/magazine/vestnik_ekonomicheskogo_pravosudiya_rf_ranee_vestnik_vas_rf/558的Full text in。
{"title":"Основные политико-правовые аргументы pro и contra идеи субординации займов участников юридических лиц (Main Political and Legal pro and contra Arguments of the Idea of Loan Subordination for Members of Legal Entities)","authors":"Ainur Shaidullin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3691584","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3691584","url":null,"abstract":"Russian Abstract: В статье рассматриваются ключевые доводы, которые обсуждаются в российском и зарубежном научном дискурсе применительно к вопросу о необходимости понижения в очередности (субординации) займов участников юридических лиц. Главными аргументами в пользу субординации являются злоупотребление принципом ограниченной ответственности, стимулирование более раннего открытия процедуры, недопустимость переноса финансовых рисков, создание ложной видимости платежеспособности и др. Основное возражение против состоит в том, что понижение в очередности дестимулирует попытки санации общества вне формальной процедуры несостоятельности (банкротства). Автор приходит к выводу, что изложенные аргументы наряду с зарубежным опытом должны приниматься во внимание при разработке оптимального регулирования в России. \u0000 \u0000English Abstract: The author considers the key arguments that are discussed in the Russian and foreign scientific discourse in relation to the need to reduce the priority (subordination) of loans for members of legal entities. The main arguments in favor of subordination are the abuse of the limited liability principle, stimulation of an earlier opening of the procedure, inadmissibility of the transfer of financial risks, and the creation of false solvency, etc. The main objection is that the reduction in priority discourages the attempts to reorganize the company outside the formal insolvency (bankruptcy) procedure. The author reaches the conclusion that the presented arguments along with foreign experience should be taken into account in the development of an optimal regulation in Russia. \u0000 \u0000Full text in Russian: https://zakon.ru/magazine/vestnik_ekonomicheskogo_pravosudiya_rf_ranee_vestnik_vas_rf/558.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89765762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：