Search

The lawmaker expressly mentions the bodies that apply the insolvency procedure, respectively: the courts, the syndic judge, the judicial administrator and the judicial liquidator. In the course of the insolvency procedure, other participants also intervene, respectively: the meeting of creditors, the committee of creditors and the special admi-nistrator. The special administrator is the legal representative of the debtor, a legal entity, in the event that he retains his right of administration, or the mandatory representative of the debtor's associates/shareholders, for the situation in which the debtor's right of administration is lifted.

The purpose of insolvency procedure is to satisfy the creditors holding receivables on the debtor's estate, and in order to be a creditor entitled to participate in insolvency procedure against the debtor, it is necessary to meet two cumulative conditions, the first concerning the drafting and filing an application for registration of the receivable, and the second, the effective registration of the creditor in the lists of receivables on the debtor's estate, after the receivable was admitted. The creditor tables has a complex role in the insolvency procedure. The main attributions of the creditor's table result from the content of the regulation and are limited to this role established by the regulation.

In a world dominated by continuous growth, the cash and cash equivalents represents one of the most important criteria in establishing the business success. In order to understand the importance of the cash and cash equivalents in the accounting principles (especially in the continuity activity principle), I performed a statistical evaluation of the companies listed on Bucharest Stock Exchange in order to determine the effect of the liquidity and indebtness indicators in the day-by-day activity of the most important romanian entities. This set of indicators shows the ability of companies to meet their short-term debts, and their importance is given by the possibility of covering a continuous flow of goods and services necessary for the pecuniary activity. A low level of liquidity is the first signal of a downturn in the near future and the generation of financial problems that can later lead to the declaration of insolvency.

The purpose of the article is to reveal the peculiarities of the cross-border insolvency procedure under the law of England and to identify the theoretical and practical problems of the theory of universalism. The article examines the procedure of a cross-border insolvency under the law of England and describes the theoretical and practical problems of the theory of universalism. It is noted that the main legal act that regulates the issue of a cross-border insolvency in the territory of England is The Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006, which is an implementation of the UNCITRAL Model Law. It was found that the provisions of the Regulations allow the existence of several types of proceedings, among which there is a classic cross-border insolvency procedure, which, in turn, is characterized by the theory of universalism. Other types include domestic insolvency proceedings complicated by a foreign element and concurrent insolvency proceedings, where there are two or more simultaneous proceedings concerning the same debtor, one of which takes place directly in a Great Britain. The author emphasizes that the recognition of a foreign insolvency procedure in Great Britain is necessary for the implementation of a classic cross-border insolvency procedure. It has been found that in the event of the existence of a classic cross-border insolvency procedure, a foreign insolvency administrator can be provided with significant judicial assistance, thanks to which the identification, preservation and return of the debtor's assets to the liquidation mass and their realization are greatly facilitated and become possible. The problem of the application of the classic cross-border procedure is pointed out from a review of the practice of the courts of England and the presence of the rule in Gibbs. It was revealed that, despite the established opinion in the English legal doctrine that the rule in Gibbs is the biggest obstacle to the application of the classic cross-border insolvency procedure, in fact the difficulty of its application lies in the banal reluctance of the English courts to do so, as well as the interest of the latter in any stronger protection of interests creditors, which, in turn, may manifest itself in the opening of concurrent proceedings. It has been proven that the stated position of the English courts has a negative character, because it will certainly lead to redundant economic costs, which are unjustified and unnecessary in view of the fact that in the classic cross-border insolvency procedure according to the provisions of the Regulations, the protection of the interests of creditors is quite important and certainly takes place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The insolvency of an economic entity is determined by a number of exogenous or endogenous factors. Among the exogenous factors can be included the controls of the control bodies (in the financial, sanitary, environmental field, etc.), and among the endogenous factors are the company's employees, the decision-making management, the shareholders, etc. The role of control bodies is to combat illicit elements in the management of the company, imposing through their controls, warnings, contraventions or subsequent disciplinary investigations compliance with the law and business ethics. The aim of this paper is to establish whether there is a direct correlation between the number of controls performed by public control bodies in the variation of the number of insolvencies declared in the last 6 consecutive financial years (2014 - 2019).

The pattern of fraud in reorganization operations follows a route very well known by economic criminals that is difficult to combat or prove. Frauds that occur in reorganization operations, be they reorganizations, insolvencies, liquidations or mergers, are sometimes at the limit of the law, at least in terms of documentation. However, the Romanian legislation also punishes the intention, which, however, does not appear in supporting documents and thus, represents the main problem in this sector. The aim of this paper is to present and analyze the particularities of fraud in reorganization operations, in terms of merger, insolvency, liquidation, but also other types of fraud that may occur within a company.

In a world dominated by continuous growth, the cash and cash equivalents represents one of the most important criteria in establishing the business success. In order to understand the importance of the cash and cash equivalents in the accounting principles (especially in the continuity activity principle), I performed a statistical evaluation of the companies listed on Bucharest Stock Exchange in order to determine the effect of the liquidity and indebtness indicators in the day-by-day activity of the most important romanian entities. This set of indicators shows the ability of companies to meet their short-term debts, and their importance is given by the possibility of covering a continuous flow of goods and services necessary for the pecuniary activity. A low level of liquidity is the first signal of a downturn in the near future and the generation of financial problems that can later lead to the declaration of insolvency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As it is well known, the insolvency procedure involves the collaboration of the insolvent company, of the syndic judge, of the creditors and, of course, of the judicial administrator. Once the state of insolvency is established by the court, one of the first steps is to assess the debts of the insolvent company, and this action can be done only by communicating the state of insolvency to the creditors, in order to allow them to record their claims to the company. At this stage, an important role is that of the judicial administrator, who must work with all those involved in the procedure in order to determine the amounts owed to the creditors. The judicial administrator is not limited to receiving the creditors' requests. He must analyze each claim, must establish the amount claimed and ascertain whether that claim is based on a valid title. The prescription period affects the claim of any creditor, however, in the field of insolvency, the judicial administrator and not the debtor is the one who, researching the claim, will be able to reject it on the grounds of completion of the prescription period. According to the Law No 85/2006, currently repealed, sometimes, in practice, the judicial administrator did not investigate the basis of the creditor's right, considering that he was affected by the prescription period. This practice has been and is questionable, because, after a possible contrary decision of the court, it is not clear whether the foundation of the claim has been investigated, because, in the absence of observations, it can be considered that the judicial administrator did not formulate objections. The last insolvency regulation in Romania, namely the Law No 85/2014, has offered to the judicial administrator the right to stop the investigation if he considers that the respective claim is prescribed. In this study we will analyze whether the current regulation has improved the insolvency procedure, clearly giving this right to the judicial administrator. By studying the motivation of a case settled by the Bucharest Court of Appeal, we have concluded that there is no logical basis for recognizing the right to terminate the investigation of the claim if he considers that it is prescribed. On the contrary, this approach will, in our opinion, lead to the extension of the procedure to the detriment of the creditors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The year of 2020 was an atypical year in what concerns both the employer-employee relationship, but also when looking to the ordinary performance of the labour agreements. No matter if it was a suspension or temporary cessation of the normal business activity, the revenues reduction was mainly felt by employees whose labour agreements were adjusted accordingly and whose income decreased during the pandemic period. This is also the reason why, in line with the mandatory case law of the CJEU, Member States shall continue to work toward the clearest possible fulfillment of the obligation to guarantee the employees' rights. We will analyze in the following paragraphs, the main means and methods for protecting the employees' rights in the context where the employer is facing an insolvency procedure. The state of insolvency, as a factual matter, means giving the employer a chance of effective and real recovery, with the possibility of reintegrating the employer into ordinary civil circuit. It is clear that, in the course of insolvency proceedings, the employees working for the affected company will be the first ones to suffer from the lack of financial resources of the employer, who, in this case will not be able to pay their salaries. Of course, this situation requires adequate protection of the employees' rights and interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pattern of fraud in reorganization operations follows a route very well known by economic criminals that is difficult to combat or prove. Frauds that occur in reorganization operations, be they reorganizations, insolvencies, liquidations or mergers, are sometimes at the limit of the law, at least in terms of documentation. However, the Romanian legislation also punishes the intention, which, however, does not appear in supporting documents and thus, represents the main problem in this sector. The aim of this paper is to present and analyze the particularities of fraud in reorganization operations, in terms of merger, insolvency, liquidation, but also other types of fraud that may occur within a company. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The insolvency of an economic entity is determined by a number of exogenous or endogenous factors. Among the exogenous factors can be included the controls of the control bodies (in the financial, sanitary, environmental field, etc.), and among the endogenous factors are the company's employees, the decision-making management, the shareholders, etc. The role of control bodies is to combat illicit elements in the management of the company, imposing through their controls, warnings, contraventions or subsequent disciplinary investigations compliance with the law and business ethics. The aim of this paper is to establish whether there is a direct correlation between the number of controls performed by public control bodies in the variation of the number of insolvencies declared in the last 6 consecutive financial years (2014 - 2019) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In contentious matters, when the conditions impose it, the judge will put in discussion of the parties the necessity of introducing other persons in the procedure; if neither party requests the introduction of the third party in question, and the judge considers that the case cannot be heard without the participation of the third party, he will dismiss the claim, without ruling on the merits. The legal text imposes two conditions for hearing the case without ruling on the merits: neither party to request the introduction of the third party and the judge to appreciate that the case cannot be heard without the participation of the third party. The text does not state whether the necessity of fulfillment of the second condition must be brought to the attention of the parties before or after the judgement is delivered (by the decision rejecting the application itself). However, the interpretation of the legal text leads to the conclusion that the first one is the solution considered by the legislator. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper examines the legal force of various procedural acts delivered within the frame of the insolvency procedure as regulated by Law 85/2014. The study aims to assert the res judicata effects of the syndic judge judgments and to find out if the related procedural acts approved or scrutinized by the syndic judge or issued by the insolvency administrator or liquidator during the insolvency procedure enjoy such effects, concluding that, while not all these acts enjoy res judicata, all of them have binding legal force upon all participants to the procedure and even upon third parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The insolvency procedure is a special procedure aiming to treat all the claims against the insolvent debtor's estate in a unitary and unique manner. By that, the opening of the insolvency procedure is fundamentally prohibiting any attempt of the creditors to simultaneously recover their claim through alternate procedures, like arbitration. This paper examines, from various perspectives, the incompatibility of these procedures running simultaneously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ekonomski Vjesnik is the property of Ekonomski Vjesnik and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

From the moment when the debtor and / or the creditors registered with the court the applications for opening the insolvency proceedings, the syndic judge is entrusted with their resolution, which essentially consists of the opening or not of the insolvency procedure. With novelty, Law no. 85/2014 on Insolvency and Insolvency Prevention Procedures regulated for both the debtor and the creditors the possibility that, after the filing of the application and until the date of its settlement, it would formulate requests for a presidential ordinance aimed either at the temporary suspension of individual enforcement measures against the debtor or the suspension of assets or property rights from the debtor's assets or the imposition of measures to preserve them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a market economy, insolvency is a common phenomenon. Its amplitude is, however, an important barometer for sustainable economic development and for the normal economic processes and financial stability and predictability of the business environment, entrepreneurial management quality. The fundamental purpose of opening insolvency proceedings is the "freeze" of debtor's debts up to that time at which it will be remove the possibility of establishing new flows accessories, and continuing to pay all current liabilities and debt installments history.

In this study we intend to make an analysis of the contestation to the insolvency condition, namely the processual means that may be used by the debtor against whom an application for opening the insolvency procedure has been filed. In the light of a rich judicial practice in this area, we consider it appropriate to compare the legal provisions found in Article 72 of the Law No 85/2014, as amended and supplemented, with the jurisprudential interpretations, in order to better understand this means of defence made available to the debtor by the legislator. Thus, we will observe the nature and the conditions in which the debtor's right to contestation may be exercised, the reasons which can be invoked and the evidence that he can use to demonstrate the lawfulness of his contestation, as well as the legal effects and consequences determined by this procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The law no. 287/2009 on the New Civil Code brings important changes to the law institutions and their principles, being established and acknowledged both by the judicial doctrine and by the legal practice. Still, the theme of this paper is not addressed to the legislative technique approached by the legislator, but is rather aimed at highlighting the impact, the implications, the changes, the controversies and the difficulties in application, brought by the New Civil Code to the insolvency procedure regulated by the Law no. 85/2006. The law no. 85/2006 on the insolvency procedure, as well as many other regulating laws belonging to the commercial law, have remained in force, as they are not included in the provisions of the Law no. 287/2009 on the New Civil Code, and as such we cannot ignore the changes in the national commercial legislation after the entering into force of the New Civil Code, namely after October 1st 2011. The new regulations, such as the definition of the professional and the enterprise, the deed of trust, the mortgage and the administration of the mortgaged goods, the prescription of debts, the separation of patrimonies, the forfeiture of the term benefit, have an impact upon the enforcement of the procedure of insolvency. Without pretending an exhaustive approach, this study shall reveal a possible interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of the New Civil Code with respect to the procedure of insolvency, being aimed at bringing a plus in the incipient doctrine in this field. Just like in the study regarding the remand agreement called “The prediction and prevention of insolvency Law 85/2006 on the procedure of insolvency” presented and sustained in the 4th edition of the International Scientific Session - Challenges of the Knowledge Society – this paper shall tackle the provisions of the two laws through the eyes of the practitioner, of the professional who enters into direct contact with the court of law and the enforcement of the law, under a double aspect, of the lawyer and the practitioner under insolvency, trying to delimit their practical applicability.

Given the economic crisis that Romania is going through and which influenced in a negative manner the activity of economic agents throughout the country, Law no. 381/2009 has been adopted for the implementation of the preventive agreement and ad-hoc mandate, in order to support companies facing economic difficulties in their activity. Law no. 381/2009 became applicable on January 13, 2010 and it implements, as an alternative to the difficult and time-consuming procedure of insolvency, a contractual mechanism for companies facing difficulties in organizing their activities, outside the insolvency procedure, with limited involvement from the court. This regulation is seen as a solution against the opening of the insolvency procedure. The solution applies especially to small and middle sized companies. The preventive agreement implies a longer deadline for payment liabilities based on a friendly agreement with the creditors. It is a mechanism for avoiding insolvency and it consists of an agreement made between the debtor and the creditors regarding the way in which the debtor, which is in a difficult financial position, will pay all its outstanding debts. The law applies to all legal entities which reorganize a company going through a difficult financial period, without being in insolvency and which are called debtors. Nevertheless, the preventive agreement law still forces us to relate to the notion of insolvency.

The purpose of the present study is to provide a broad picture of the key employment relations, which take place in companies that are subject to insolvency procedures. In order to achieve this goal, the present study sets off to identify the existing parallelism, and yet malfunctions, that can be observed between Labour Law and Insolvency Law. Particularly, when the time comes to address the principle of preservation, embedded in all legal transactions, and owingly in every business. Moving forward, the study looks into the importance of the insolvency procedure eing declared, in order to steer the company away from the difficulties it may be undergoing. This moment will determine the labour related strategy to be favoured, since it will follows from an array of existing choices determined by the Law. The most relevant of these measures, introduced into the wording of the Insolvency Law text, through Royal Decree 3/2009, are equally discussed in the study, given their importance. Finally, the present study contemplates the manner in which the aforesaid measures are to be observed, in accordance with the specificities of the insolvency procedure in place. Accordingly, the focus shifts in the final part of the study to the employment relations existing between the employer and the employee, and in particular, to the contract of employment, and to the changes that may occur to the terms of the contract, including a possible suspension to the duty to perform under the contract, the company¿s resource to calling for collective redundancies, the situation of senior management contracts once the insolvency procedure has been initiated, possible situations arising out of potential transfers of undertakings, or the relevance of the Collective Agreement that may be in place.

Copyright of Contemporary Legal Institutions is the property of Romanian American University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Law No. 149/2012 brings new regulations in the insolvency proceedings, including setting some rules on the application of insolvency proceedings to individual entrepreneurs. In the following paper there will be analyzed some aspects related to individuals who are subjects of insolvency law, the applicable procedures, the cases when the entrepreneur has the right, or, on the contrary, is obliged to request the initiation of insolvency procedure, his responsibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of the new legal framework existing after the entry into force of the Law No 85/2014, this study analyzes the final table of claims and the contestations against it, by emphasizing the notable differences as compared to the old regulation - the Law No 85/2006 - and the importance of the final table of claims over the debtor's estate in the insolvency procedure, as well as the exceptional character of the contestations against it. The registration of claims in the final table of claims against the debtor's estate is generating rights for the creditors, and, consequently, the analysis and the thorough study of how this is produced, of the content of the final table of claims, of the time of its registration and publication, as well as of the rights and obligations of the participants in this procedure are essential. The contestations against the final table of claims have an exceptional character and the conditions in which these may be formulated are strictly, expressly and limitatively enumerated by the law. Under these circumstances, this legal remedy is approached from the perspective of the persons who may have the legal standing to file the contestation, from the perspective of the time limit for their submission - which appears as a highly opportune legislative novelty for the stability of the procedure - and, finally, from the perspective of the exceptional situations which may lead to the admission of such contestation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through this study, the author starts from the monistic regulation of the current Civil Code, raising for discussion the possibility of adopting a new Commercial Code, which should include all the essential regulations of the special laws in force, with regard to the legal relations in which those who pursue professional activities participate, regulations on the special status of the participants in the legal relations intended for professional activities, the trading companies and the trading professionals who are natural persons, regulations on the contracts and guarantees specific to professional activities (leasing contract, franchise contract, banking contracts and guarantees), regulations on credit titles, the regulation of the insolvency procedure, updated for all areas of professional activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept al Afacerilor is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Collected Papers of the Law Faculty of the University of Rijeka / Zbornik Pravnog Fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci is the property of Pravni fakultet Sveucilista u Rijeci and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Insolvency and human security are two particular concepts belonging to different domains which apparently do not justify an associated review. However through this article we shall demonstrate the complexity of their relation and its impact upon national security. The first part of the article considers the overall economics' implication in security and does a preliminary clarification of the concepts in question. The second part is entierly dedicated to the causal link between insolvency, human security and national security. The article is based on a multidisciplinary approach and it is supported by official and updated information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The situation of auditors framed in the insolvency procedure is still atypical and urge analysis, considering the fact that auditors are not members of directory boards or supervising boards of a company; their role is restrained to control the administrator's activity and the current company management. In our opinion, the auditors may not be included in the category of subject - directory board members and/or supervision, unless the legal provision is interpreted excessively in an extend way. Former legal provisions, as in article 124 Law 64/1995, auditors were nominated expressively as persons against whom liability actions may be introduced. In legal text in force, contemporary with modifications and amendments made in 2006 to the Law 31/1995, those are not stated expressively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This analysis of the compatibility between the dispositions of the two regulations is motivated by the necessity of knowing in what extent, within the insolvency procedure, can the application of the dispositions in the Civil Procedural Code be used. In this context, article 149 in Law no.85/2006 expressly specifies that its dispositions are completed by the ones in the Civil Procedural Code, inasmuch as the compatibility allows it. The insolvency procedure law is a special law and because of that the civil procedure norms it comprises take precedence before the common law norms. But, in case the special law does not cover all the situations that might occur during the procedure, the instances, depending on the case, apply the provisions of the Civil Procedural Code, inasmuch as they are compatible. We have to mention the fact that the two regulations aim at recovering the claims from the debtor. The law regarding the insolvency procedure has regulated the procedure of patrimonial liability and the execution of such a decision is made by the judicial executor, according to the Civil Procedural Code. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The legal nature of the liability stated by art. 138, Law no 85/2006 refers to its special liability feature, which borrows a lot of characteristics of a tort liability. Being classified as tort liability, it means that it can be invoked under the conditions of general liability tort must be cumulatively fulfilled, as stated in Civil Code art. 998-999, namely: the existence of a prejudice, of illegal acts, the existence of causal relationship between act and injury, and the offense to be committed with guilt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]