sou 1999 1 - Regeringen

32 Summary SOU 1999:1
the opposite party to an agreement may not terminate the contract as a result
of any grounds of termination which arose prior thereto, if the debtor
under reorganisation performs, or provides security for, that which relates
to the period since the commencement of the reorganisation. The restriction
on termination cannot be contractually excluded. Ipso facto clauses are not
covered by the rule other than where, possibly, by analogy. Certain other
proposals including, inter alia, the abolition of the right of priority for tax
claims and the redrafting of the right of priority for certain wage claims and
business mortgage were not, however, carried out.
In the Swedish Parliament, politicians from all political parties were unhappy
with the fact that the Ministry’s handling of the proposals of the Insolvency
Committee took such a long time and that the proposals were only
partially implemented. In various motions, it was stated that the new Act
would not result in any appreciable reduction in bankruptcies or an increase
in the number of business reorganisations.
The Right of Priority Committee (JU 1996:02) 1 was thus appointed in
1996 with the task, once again, of reviewing the right of priority rules which
are relevant when choosing between business reorganisation without bankruptcy,
and bankruptcy. The aim was, thus, to promote business reorganisations
through compositions, without bankruptcy. However, the Committee
was also naturally to take into consideration that the rules would not
threaten the provision of loans to solvent companies. The subjects which
were specifically mentioned in the terms of reference were business mortgage
(which, however, it was presupposed would essentially remain), rights
of priority for tax claims, and rights of priority for wage claims. With regard
to wage claims, the Committee was to provide employees, in the event
of bankruptcy, with protection which would be as comprehensive as possible
but, at the same time, pursuant to supplementary terms of reference
which were issued 1 1/2 years later, would save SEK 300 million, or approximately
30-50% of the State’s expenditures on wage guarantees. In
addition, the Committee was charged with the task of investigating whether
a debtor under reorganisation should be able to terminate contracts prematurely.
_______________
1 Supreme Court Justice Torgny Håstad was appointed as Chairman of the Right
of Priority Committee. Other committee members were Rune Berglund, Laila
Bäck, Lars U Granberg and Kristina Zakrisson (all Social Democratic Party), Per
Rosengren (Left Party), Leif Stenberg (Green Party), Eskil Erlandsson (Centre
Party), Bengt Harding Olson (Liberal Party), Stig Rindborg (Conservative Party)
and Margareta Börjesson (Christian Democratic Party). The secretary was Judge
Ylva Norling Jönsson.