29.01.2015 Views

Reform of French Bankruptcy Law - Fried Frank

Reform of French Bankruptcy Law - Fried Frank

Reform of French Bankruptcy Law - Fried Frank

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

parliamentary debate on the Act, a provision was proposed that would have allowed expedited lay<strong>of</strong>fs<br />

during a safeguard procedure. This aroused strong objections and, as a result, was not included in the Act.<br />

In a safeguard procedure, judicial reorganization, or judicial liquidation, employee wage claims have an<br />

absolute priority over all other claims, followed, in order <strong>of</strong> priority, by administrative expenses, the<br />

privilege for any new money extended in a previous conciliation procedure, and certain claims arising after<br />

commencement <strong>of</strong> the safeguard procedure, as discussed above. 18 By contrast, in the US, wage claims<br />

earned within 180 days <strong>of</strong> the earlier <strong>of</strong> either the date the bankruptcy petition is filed or the date <strong>of</strong><br />

cessation <strong>of</strong> the debtor’s business are given a fourth-level priority over other unsecured claims only up to<br />

an amount <strong>of</strong> $10,000 per employee, and are subordinated in priority to administrative expenses <strong>of</strong> the<br />

bankruptcy procedure, as well as certain other unsecured creditors’ claims arising after the bankruptcy<br />

filing. 19<br />

Scope <strong>of</strong> the safeguard procedure<br />

The safeguard procedure will be available for debtors meeting the following criteria:<br />

- The company must be facing serious difficulties. The term “difficulties” is not defined in the Act,<br />

but will likely be interpreted broadly to include economic, legal, financial or labor-related<br />

difficulties.<br />

- The company finds it impossible to surmount those difficulties, because <strong>of</strong> inadequate financing.<br />

- The company has not yet suspended payments, but will inevitably do so as a result <strong>of</strong> its<br />

difficulties. 20 The Act does not specify a timeframe for evaluating the imminence <strong>of</strong> a suspension<br />

<strong>of</strong> payments, but the probability <strong>of</strong> insolvency must be demonstrable; i.e., the court may require<br />

pro<strong>of</strong> that when existing debts come due, the company will not be able to pay.<br />

So long as the company has not yet ceased payments, the company’s managers can choose between the<br />

conciliation and safeguard procedures. This decision will turn on a number <strong>of</strong> factors: the conciliation<br />

procedure is rapid and can be kept confidential, but does not result in a stay against creditors, while the<br />

safeguard procedure can take longer and is public, but includes an automatic stay against creditors.<br />

18 <strong>French</strong> Commercial Code, Arts. L. 611-11, 622-17 and 641-13.<br />

19 US <strong>Bankruptcy</strong> Code, §§ 507(a)(1), (2) and (3) and 502(f).<br />

20 If, after the opening <strong>of</strong> the safeguard procedure, it is determined that the debtor had already ceased payments, the court will transform the procedure into a<br />

judicial reorganization and appoint a receiver, as discussed below.<br />

<strong>Fried</strong>, <strong>Frank</strong>, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP Client Memorandum November 17, 2005 5<br />

A Delaware Limited Liability Partnership

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!